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

Once a spec becomes sufficiently large and detailed and complicated, it becomes very difficult to ensure it is internally consistent. That's why I start every project with a METASPEC.md so that Claude can break up the task of writing SPEC.md into manageable steps.

Everyone knows a philosophy comes before a spec. Claude has to write your applications philosophy first, then you write your spec. But a philosophy is crap without a values statement, so Claude has to actually write that first.

Are you vibe coding a project by building an entire corporation around it??

They aren't saying that other models have the same overall level of capability. They are saying that the specific capability that the US Government tested is also available in other models.

That might also continue to anger the current administration, should they feel the need to, as it openly shared with other actors how to achieve the same capability. If they choose not to apply the same restriction to GPT 5.5 then an argument could be made that Anthropic is being singled out by the government.

20 years ago everyone was sold css entirely on the premise that, once the standards were adopted by all of the browsers, we would all be writing purely semantic html with completely orthogonal and swappable css. And today literally no one designs web sites that way - html today is mostly specific to presentation. It feels like pretty dramatic technological failure to me.

20 years ago everyone was also sold OOP on the premise that inheritance was the best thing to ever happen to programming. Turns out people are wrong sometimes. And especially when they're being idealistic about things.

The concept makes more sense for styling simple document style pages from 20 years ago, but it hasn't scaled to modern designs, complex web UIs and responsive pages that we want to code now, which isn't that surprising.

> we would all be writing purely semantic html with completely orthogonal and swappable css. And today literally no one designs web sites that way - html today is mostly specific to presentation

I think of HTML + CSS as the presentation layer now, and the data lives in your e.g. database and Markdown files, so the data and its presentation are still separate enough.

The idea of just swapping out the CSS to completely restyle a complex site is nice, but people need to accept this hasn't worked out (and not because devs are bad at CSS) and move on.


If you're good, the same HTML serves mobile and web clients. It's a PITA to write, sure, but if that isn't CSS succeeding then I don't know what is. There's a ton of stuff I wish was different about CSS and HTML (and JS), but going from a small portrait device to a large landscape viewport with the same html? HTML does the HTML stuff and CSS does the style stuff. The fact that you have to tweak the HTML and CSS in a loop until it's right, in order to get to the finished state doesn't indight the fact that it's the same HTML for different clients.

GP said:

> completely orthogonal and swappable css.

You're talking about having a single CSS and HTML page for multiple layouts, there aren't the same thing at all.


I feel like CSS would be in a much better place if they went with the Cassowary proposal for layout.

It would avoid the whole mess of block vs table vs float vs flexbox vs grid (and also absolute vs relative vs fixed) positioning.

Basically, it feels like 90% of CSS is it trying to fix its past layout mistakes & limitations.


a lot of semantic features like the document outline algorithm were never actually implemented by browsers so it was hindered from the start

For Vim it isn’t replacing mouse necessarily. It’s giving you another way to navigate the cursor around the buffer by giving you absolute references rather than relative motions.

“Fed up” as a phrase comes from feeding livestock up to their fill. It’s very similar to how you would say “filled up”. So the upness comes from raising the level up to the limit.

For a long time I thought that the AdSense business model was ultimately doomed because I assumed that people hate ads as much as I do. It turns out I was just wrong about what most people are willing to put up with.


I remember visiting a friend over a decade ago, and for some reason I had to use their computer for a bit. I was immediately thrown aback by all the ads everywhere and installed an ad blocker before anything else. They were very grateful, but the part that surprised me was they were annoyed by the ads but never thought to look for some way around it. It never even crossed their minds it could be done or to search for it.


All human progress in history has been due to a VERY small handful of people who think “this is bullshit, things could be better”.

The vast majority of people accept what they see as the way things are and it never occurs to them that things could be different.


Similarly, when my partner moved in I told her about the network-level adblocker and she kinda scoffed at it saying ads don't bother her. A few years later she started complaining that when she's out of the house she gets ads.


It's always absolutely shocking using a regular person's computer. How can they live like this? I have lived in this ad-free bubble for so long that I forget that's not the real world. If I had to live without adblockers, I don't think I'd ever visit the internet.


While I'm really enjoying this paper, I think you are way overstating the significance here. This is mathematically interesting, and conceptually elegant, but there is nothing in this paper that suggests a competitive regression or optimisation approach.

I might have misunderstood, but from the two "Why do X when you can do just Y with EML" sentences, I think you are describing symbolic regression, which has been around for quite some time and is a serious grown-up technique these days. But even the best symbolic regression tools do not typically "replace" other regression approaches.


I’ve been building a toy for exploring elliptic functions, modular forms, and elliptic curves. Sorry mobile support is not there yet.

https://grge.github.io/weierstrass/


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superformula

Have you heard of Superformula ? I remember playing with them few years ago.


Very cool concept and execution, well done.

I don't quite understand what is going on with the "spotlight" UI concept - I can click around on the characters and it highlights an area and it also reloads the landscape local to the character that I clicked on, so I can sort of traverse the similarity landscape this way. But I feel like I might be missing some part of the visual metaphor?


It’s just a cool visualisation


Agreed. Nice aesthetic. Terrible design.


Well, that wasn’t my conclusion at all to be clear!


I think your assumption about inlining is essentially correct. As far as I know postgres was the last major rdbms to have an optimiser fence around CTEs.


I concur, “the Germans” have created an algorithm that completely “see through” subqueries/CTEs when planning a query. The way the query is written has no bearing on the execution.


By the Germans, as you referring to Thomas Neumann's database group at TMU, Munich?


*TUM (Technical University of Munich).


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

Search: