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

Wait so moon plus sun != sun plus moon? :Thinking:

celestial objects don't need to obey algebraic commutativity!

I wonder if SCP-1313 does

What would be the best model to try something like this on a 5800XT with 8 GB RAM?

I don't know about the Ethernet part but it bothers me that even wifi has become faster than the wired USB port on our phones.

All I want to do is copy over all the photos and videos from my phone to my computer but I have to baby sit the process and think whether I want to skip or retry a failed copy. And it is so slow. USB 2.0 slow. I guess everybody has given up on the idea of saving their photos and videos over USB?


> USB 2.0 slow

Many phones indeed only support USB 2.0. For example the base iPhone 17. The Pro does support USB 3.2, however.

> I guess everybody has given up on the idea of saving their photos and videos over USB?

Correct.


Wifi is fast but the latency is terrible and the reliability is even worse. It can go up and down like a yo-yo. USB is far more predictable even if it is a bit slower.

I have a cluster of 4 RPi Zero Ws and network reliability is not great. Since it is for the chaos, it’s fine, but it’s very common to have a node be offline at any given time.

Even worse, the control plane is exposed, but for something that runs 3 Hercules mainframe emulation and two Altairs with MP/M, it’s fine.


I have a bunch of HA wifi connected sensors, I see them drop off and reconnect all the time it is most annoying.

Not sure why this happens to you. I have HA with several dozens WiFi devices and I have only 2 devices (one relay, one sensor) that disconnect regularly, they have both poor WiFi signal, one in a basement and one far from the AP. Almost all are on 2.4 GHz, not by choice, but they work well.

Why don't you get a phone with 3.0+ USB?

My last two phones in the last 4 years had at least USB 3.1


I feel like this is an artifact from the late 2010s when the talk was of removing the port completely from phones, where that was being touted alongside swapping speakers with haptic screen audio as a way to make them completely waterproof.

As wireless charging never quite reached the level hoped – see AirPower – and Google/Apple seemingly bought and never did anything with a bunch of haptic audio startups, I figure that idea died....but they never cared enough to make sure the USB port remained top end.


I'd usually be against losing ports and user serviceable stuff but if the device could actually be properly sealed up (ie no speakers, mics, charge ports, etc) that would be legitimately useful.

If the photos on the phone are visible as files on a mounted filesystem, you can use rsync to copy them. If the connection drops but recovers by itself, you can put rsync inside a while true loop until it’s doing nothing.

I’m using Dropbox for syncing photos from phone to Linux laptop, and mounting the SDcard locally for cameras, so this is a guess.


> but I have to baby sit the process and think whether I want to skip or retry a failed copy

Do you import originals or do you have the "most compatible" setting turned on?

I always assumed apple simply hated people that use windows/linux desktops so the occasional broken file was caused by the driver being sort-of working and if people complain, well, they can fuck off and pay for icloud or a mac. After upgrading to 15 pro which has 10 gbps usb-c it still took forever to import photos and the occasional broken photos kept happening, and after some research it turns out that the speed was limited by the phone converting the .heic originals into .jpg when transferring to a desktop. Not only does it limit the speed, it also degrades the quality of the photos and deletes a bunch of metadata.

After changing the setting to export original files the transfer is much faster and I haven’t had a single broken file / video. The files are also higher quality and lower filesize, although .heic is fairly computationally-demanding.

Idk about Android but I suspect it might have a similar behavior


> given up on the idea of saving their photos and videos over USB?

Until USB has monthly service business to compete with cloud storage revenue.


It allowed me dingo after dog though.

No, please read the article. No one is saying carriers cant triangulate but carriers shouldn't be able to query the gps on my device and get precise GNSS data.

> Apple made a good step in iOS 26.3 to limit at least one vector of mass surveillance, enabled by having full control of the modem silicon and firmware. They must now allow users to disable GNSS location responses to mobile carriers, and notify the user when such attempts are made to their device.


I did read the article fine, thanks for asking.

The crux of the argument seems to come from this

> It’s worth noting that GNSS location is never meant to leave your device. GNSS coordinates are calculated entirely passively.

OK so? The fact that GPS is calculated passively means nothing about the phone being asked what its position is after the fact.

The article admits this capability is no secret

> These capabilities are not secrets but somehow they have mostly slid under the radar of the public consciousness.

If the article just wants to say phones should block that ability, fine. But don't pretend this is some shady BS.


> slid under the radar of the public consciousness.

It is shady BS, and it’s why this phrase appeared in the article. Just because industry insiders are aware doesn’t mean it’s not shady.

The same applies to modern cars reporting their information back to manufacturers.


Please reread OPs comment

They never said "triangulate" but read phone for information. Your inner monologue swapped what was written with an already understood technical method.

And just because access to GPS has never been confirmed publicly before does not mean they previously only relied on tower triangulation.

Worked for Sprints network team before they bought Nextel. We had access to eeeeverything.


Can you please allow me to disable Ctrl plus Shift plus C shortcut? I've been begging for years at this point...

Personally, I'd rather get queued up on a long wait time I mean not ridiculously long but I am ok waiting five minutes to get correct it at least more correct responses.

Sure, I'll take a cup of coffee while I wait (:


i’d wait any amount of time lol.

at least i would KNOW it’s overloaded and i should use a different model, try again later, or just skip AI assistance for the task altogether.


> If I subconsciously detect that you spent 12 seconds creating this, why should I invest five minutes reading it?

The problem is it isn't easy to detect it and I'm sure the people who work on generated stuff will work hard to make detection even harder.

I have difficulty detecting even fake videos. How can I possibly I detect generated text in plain text accurately? I mean I will make plenty of false positive mistakes, accusing people of using generated text when they wrote it themselves. This will cause unnecessary friction which I don't know how to prevent.


First thought: In my experience, this is a muscle we build over time. Humans are pretty great at pattern detection, but we need some time to get there with new input. Remember 3D graphics in movies ~15 years ago? Looked mind blowingly realistic. Watching old movies now, I find they look painfully fake. YMMV of course.

Second thought: Does it _really_ matter? You find it interesting, you continue reading. You don't like it, you stop reading. That's how I do it. If I read something from a human, I expect it to be their thoughts. I don't know if I should expect it to be their hand typing. Ghost writers were a thing long before LLMs. That said, it wouldn't even _occur_ to me to generate anything I want to say. I don't even spell check. But that's me. I can understand that others do it differently.


Exactly! It must be exhausting to have this huge preoccupation with determining if something has come from an LLM or not. Just judge the content on it's own merits! Just because an LLM was involved doesn't mean the underlying ideas are devoid of value. Conversely, the fact that an LLM wasn't involved doesn't mean the content is worth your time of day. It's annoying to read AI slop, but if you're spending more effort suspiciously squinting at it for LLM sign versus assessing the content itself, then you're doing yourself a disservice IMO.

Not to be too glib but my mom would ask counter questions like this:

Why is it that we have to trim out nails when they grow? Why not leave it natural?

Why do we remove the weed in between the pavers in our backyard? Why not let it be natural?

The fact is the world around us needs constant work. Our capitalism is no different. It needs constant pruning or it becomes gluttonous. There was a book I think which said most people involved in illegal drug trafficking are barely getting by, most of the income is soaked up at the top. I don't remember the point the bio was trying to make but it feels like that way for any enterprise these days.

The richest people in the US have reportedly increased their net worth by over 1.5T over the course of the last year or so.

How is this sustainable?


Isn't this basically Entropy? Why do stars fuse and spread out their energy? Can't they just keep it all in? They are going to blow up/die out eventually, how is this sustainable?

The notion I'm getting is that these forces that drive change are bigger than all of us, and they are inherently unsustainable in the larger scale of things, pretty similar to how solar systems are not really sustainable in a scale much larger than us, but not that is still pretty small in a universal scale.

So for your perspective it might be unsustainable, but for the bigger system what you describe is smaller than a grain of sand.


The point is everything needs work. We can't just say oh capitalism produces billionaires so billionaires must be good.

Or in the absence of other competing systems which can be shown to be more efficient, we could say OK seems like billionaires are part of this ecosystem. If you'd like, similar to how we don't like mosquitos but they are nevertheless an important part of the current ecosystem, whether we like it or not. Though if we ever find a better alternative, they'd definitely be in a hard spot.

US homeowners have increased their net worth like $15 trillion since the start of the pandemic.

Besides, there's this thing called tax incidence and it's not as simple as "tax the billionaires" because it's not clear how that plays out in terms of people's wages or middle class investments.

On the other hand, land value taxes would actually be incident on landowners.


And the US monetary supply has also increased by $15 trillion: https://x.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1695809591047491857?lang...

Therefore devaluing the value of the dollar so that those who had basically steady state income (wage earners) have been completely fucked while the lucky ones had their yachts rise with the tide.


Meh. Good riddance.

$146M expected increase in tax revenue turned into $594M loss, good riddance to taxes as well I guess?

No, because the whole premise is flawed.

I mean you can’t just say that and expect not to elaborate

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

Search: