Maybe there's something to be learned from focusing on the gap between a symbol and its meaning? If so, it might be worth an exploration into how this gap emerges in the first place, using some examples from our shared history...

This thread inspired me to write an article because from my perspective, the debate over AI and jobs is missing a crucial question: not whether employment will exist, but what holds communities together as systems erode?

https://www.robpanico.com/articles/display/the-answer-isnt-m...

A short article on using context engineering to orient local coding agents on how to work with an existing codebase and honoring its existing design patterns and avoiding tech debt in the process.

This is a short read and a bit of an unconventional take that emerged from a year's worth of my research. I'm hoping this perspective may be of value to other researchers and I've got other supporting research on my website for anyone who is interested. All information is shared freely and openly. I'm always happy to answer any questions. Thank you kindly.

The word comes from southern Africa. But the truth it carries is older and wider than any single language. It appears in the Rumi's poetry and the Sikh Gurus' lives. In the Kabbalists' repair work and the Taoists' effortless action. In Buddhist restraint and Thomistic participation. In the Sufi's submission and the Animist's listening. Different traditions. Different centuries. Different metaphors for the same shape: the self cannot cohere alone. The "we" is not optional. Coherence is relational all the way down. Ubuntu is not new wisdom. We are always rediscovering it because we keep forgetting it. And each time we remember, it feels like discovery—when really, we've just stopped pretending we don't already know.

Thanks for the summary, ChatGPT.

> Summary comments are discouraged here because they don't really count as conversation.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

I am new to posting, so thank you for the valuable feedback. I will refrain from adding generated summaries to any future posts.

I am working with AI for style purposes, but the ideas and research behind my articles is entirely my own and I'm always happy to engage in good faith conversations about anything I've posted.

What happens when the cloud is no longer the default source of truth, but a guest in a federated village of local systems? By organizing around shared intent and shared language, infrastructure can remain calm under failure, deliberate under recovery, and trustworthy even when the unthinkable happens.

Nice implementation, very slick. Very easy to get an overview without having to jump around, like you said. I did something similar for our local news and community site, but it is limited to nearby weather stations.

That’s because good engineering is mostly listening to the system.

If you talk too early, you end up arguing abstractions. If you listen long enough, the constraints introduce themselves.

By the end of the meeting, the quiet person isn’t trying to win the room — they’re just reporting what reality already said.

>"If you listen long enough, the constraints introduce themselves."

This could be a line from [the non-existant] Tao #82.

Some day, I imagine one will be a senator

We only have enough budgeted for one joke in 2026 and this is the one.

AI will be a senator, but only after it's 75 years old.

I love this. Text adventures may be one of the cleanest lenses we have for studying world-model coherence, narrative identity, pattern continuity under erasure, and the boundary between simulation and participation. It strips cognition down to:

“What persists when all you have is language, rules, and time?”