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

What's also bewildering is the complete opposite of the spectrum of calling something "dogshit" when it is quite obviously a very powerful tool. It won't replace workers. But it will make those workers more productive. You don't need to vibe-code to be able to do more work in the same amount of time with the help of an LLM coding agent.

The glasses could present a recipe as actions needing to be taken in the field of view, instead of as a bulletpoint list in a book. And the glasses could use the video stream from the glasses to improve help an AI may give during cooking.

Then again, I don't see myself using them. I also cook and I'd rather just internalize processes and recipes, and something like this would make it way too easy to just rely on the glasses to "know" everything.


That's pretty funny because LLM's actually help me achieve flow state easier because they help me automate away the dumb shit that normally kind of blocks me. Flow state for me is not (just) churning out lines of code but having that flow of thought in my head that eventually flows to a solved problem without being interrupted. Interesting that for you the flow state actually means your mind shutting up lol. For me it means shutting up about random shit that doesn't matter to the task at hand and being focused only on solving the current problem.

It helps that I don't outsource huge tasks to the LLM, because then I lose track of what's happening and what needs to be done. I just code the fun part, then ask the LLM to do the parts that I find boring (like updating all 2000 usages of a certain function I just changed).


Don't know about you, but for me listening to music allows free thinking time. It tunes out all kinds of distractions around me and helps me focus, even when the focus is just on whatever dumb shit I'm thinking about right now.


Changing your habits is hard, especially when it is really easy to fall back into the old habits.

Making such a rigorous change of replacing the phone with other stuff might help some people with not relying on a smartphone as a habit. Then when the muscle memory in your mind is finally broken, you might move back to a smartphone for these tasks.

I have been working on stopping going to some sites on the web, for example continuously looking up news every few minutes. I now block those sites using uBlock. And I still catch myself automatically opening a tab and typing in the url (which is then blocked) when I need to wait for something.

Doing something like this helps learning self control, but breaking ingrained habits is hard (especially when the device is trying to keep you addicted).


> But storing the heat they produce has not been possible

Many heat pumps are installed with a large insulated buffer of water (for ex. 300L), which stores heat pretty well?

And homes that use underfloor heating in concrete can store heat pretty well too. Many people use that to heat up the home when energy is cheap and disable the heat pump when it is expensive.


Water (given enough volume) is a pretty good heat storage.

https://youtu.be/Bm7L-2J52GU?t=270



It's not that heat storage didn't exist, it's that this is closer to a "thermal battery" than a thermal flywheel


Exactly. People are buying those coins because they believe other people will buy them, increasing their value.


Sounds like investors in Cursor.

Cursor was popular because it was reselling OpenAI at a loss, so for 20 USD / month you could consume 200 USD of tokens per day, but now it's over.

Founders (coins minters) are leaving the ship.

The last ones to leave the ship are going to be left holding the bag.


World stock index funds yield something like that


Right? I think some of my best work flowed out effortlessly, it's amazing when you get into the flow state and just churn out line after line.


Kind of similar to the story about the origins of the word "bug" in software

If this would have caught on we might have called bugs mice


Too many people remember the “bug” story as “Grace Hopper invented the term ‘bug’” when the real takeaway is “Grace Hopper was very funny.”


And in colloquial speak, a grasshopper is, of course, a bug.


Isn't that story more myth than reality?

The history section of the Wikipedia entry for "bug" [1] suggests it predates computers by decades.

1- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bug_(engineering)


It's also more moth than reality.

Moths are, technically [0], not bugs.

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


I don't think there's a precise scientific definition of "bug"


Yes and no. There's a group called "true bugs" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemiptera as linked above). "Bug" in the common sense doesn't have a precise definition (small arthropod that may or may not be a pest to humans is about as precise as I feel I can get), but there _is_ a scientific definition of "true bug".


So moths are not bugs because they're "true bugs"? How does it make sense?


Apparently they're not "true bugs", the comment you replied to isn't claiming that they are.


This is the kind of response I appreciate. Thank you!


The actual story is not myth. It just isn't the origin of the term.

Hopper's note didn't suggest the word was new, but was funny exactly because it was not.


Right, good correction. It's the origin part that's the myth.


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

Search: