Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ghayes's commentslogin

For example, https://mydetector.ai/ai-code-detector/ says 90% likely AI. Not that I trust the tools, but there are telltales to me in this function from the site:

     Object.values(zipBuckets).forEach(function(b) {
       var latest = b.reports.map(function(r){return r.date;}).sort().reverse()[0];
       // ...
       var popup =
         '<div style="font-family: Inter, sans-serif; min-width:220px; max-width:280px;">' +
         (noteLines ? '<ul style="font-size:12px; color:#3a4a2a; padding-left:16px; margin:0;">' + noteLines + '</ul>' : '') +
       // ...
     }
Certain ergonomics are hard to miss since a human who writes heavy FP would opt for a `(r) => r.date` lambda, where the computer has no problem writing out inline `function(r)`-style declarations. Similarly, the HTML mapping function could go either way, but mixing in large sets of text with hard constants would be really uncommon for humans to write.

JavaScript is always a mess, but it's a _different_ mess between humans and AI, and this function `loadCommunityReports` really reads AI-first to me.

reply


I’ve only seen this snippet (on phone so no source access), but var + no fat arrow could also indicate someone who learned js a long time ago and use as what they’re used to.

reply


Instead of focusing on why having a website is better for customers (100% it is), the article is really an attack on... developers at Meta and tech other companies? I love a good profanity laced rant, but the entire article reads unfocused and unpersuasive.


the entire article reads unfocused and unpersuasive.

Nice, a human wrote it! Thanks for the recommendation!


I disagree. It is not an attack on the developers, but the platforms‘ mechanics.


I agree, the reasons were skipped, except for business hours and rates. People really need a reason to spend countless hours on something digital.


Countless hours? Get someone to make you a webpage, they can use Wix or Shopify or something like this. It’s never been easier or cheaper. In the grand scheme of running a business, it’s one of the best effort:return ratios you can find.


He is talking about a website that involves creating and designing individual pages. If each page takes 2-3 hours, including content writing, research, and photographing, you are looking at 15-50 hours for a company site. That's a lot of investment for some people.


Right, don't do that. Hire someone for it. It's not that much work in the grand scheme of running a business, and the return on investment is enormous. If you're not built to do this in support of your business, you're really just not built to run a business at all.


Honestly, skip planning mode and tell it you simply want to discuss and to write up a doc with your discussions. Planning mode has a whole system encouraging it to finish the plan and start coding. It's easier to just make it clear you're in a discussion and write a doc phase and it works way better.


That's a good suggestion. I'll try it next time. That said, it's really easy to start small things in planning mode and it's still an annoyance for them. This feels like a workflow that should be native.


I’ve really enjoyed Shapr3D (built on Parasolid). Nothing particularly better than the usual competitors but the interface is really intuitive and you can realistically develop on an iPad. Curious if anyone else has had experiences with it.


It’s my default. It is hands down the easiest to use modern CAD software today, and I’ve tried most of them. I too use it on the iPad and Mac, wish I could get it to install under WINE.


I like it to. I am just not happy with how they handle model history. And it is missing many of the tooling I like from things like Fusion. A thread tool would go a long way for hobbyists.


To be fair, that's not exactly what Loper Bright says. It holds that the courts should read the statute independently and not assume that Agency rules or procedures are prima facie controlling where the statute is ambiguous.


I am always worried when I bring development boards on airplanes. I assume most people are reasonable, but I worry for a few that might not be.


I brought a 5G Peplink modem (which has 4 external antennas) in my checked luggage and got "randomly searched" by TSA on both legs of a trip once, which I thought was pretty hilarious.


I used to travel with a case full of parts for work and just started leaving extra zipties inside because the TSA agents that would search it wouldn't always ziptie it back closed after they were done.


I've brought mini clusters of bare Pis many times before (and other strange contraptions with jumper wires all around), and the only time I was ever stopped for a deeper search was when I left my x-ray shielding bag for film in the same case with the mini cluster.


Whenever I see these and play with models like this (and the demos on this page), the movement in the world always feel like a dolly zoom. Things in the distance tend to stay in the distance, even as the camera moves in that direction, and only the local area changes features.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_zoom


I feel like some of the newer standards like CSS Grid instead of tables might be the best way to go. Many HTML/CSS improvements were not just bloat but actually better standards to build on.


Right! Crazy fonts or cursors, not on smolweb (as another use put it) but Flex and Grid are almost necessary. There are loads of things that could be dropped (it feels like).

I just want one of these browsers to give me a proper ComboBox (text, search and drop-down thing)


From accessibility background: Please stop using CSS for table data. It does not translate to my screenreader.


Yes, but grids are everywhere in the UIs, not just the tables. In 2000-s, the problem was the opposite of what we have now: every interface was a table full of tables, because there was no other way to position things reliably.

But now we have best of both worlds: use <table> for the actual tables, and CSS grid for UI layouts.


You still need to have tables.


And <marquee>, of course.


But the rendering engine might be easier to build with TABLE as a specialization of CSS Grid layout rendering rather than the slow real world work of CSS Grid being a generalization of TABLE rendering.


Yeah, I loved Elm, but the restriction that you can't build your own "effect" modules really made it impossible to embrace. Say you want to use a new web API similar to using Elm's core `Http`, well... you can try and fork Elm...


You can use webcomponents to work around a few of those limitations.


Though, sadly it's not a true image; it's composed as an SVG in HTML. So you can't copy-paste the image into chats.


I noticed that after the fact as well. You could always manually take a screenshot to turn it into a jpg. Or just send the link.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: