Hence the presumed implication behind the public_id field in GP's comment: anywhere identifiers are exposed, you use the public_id field, thereby preventing ID guessing while still retaining the benefits of ordered IDs where internal lookups are concerned.
Edit: just saw your edit, sounds like we're on the same page!
You know the fun thing is, something like the Allwinner A133 - which is one of the most popular SOCs in lower-end tablets today - is like $5, or $3 in quantity.
It turns out it's actually not as hard as you'd expect to whip together your own board with one of those + LPDDR4 RAM + eMMC storage + fixings, and get yourself something like what you're talking about for... I dunno, sub $50? Maybe even sub $20 depending on how much RAM you put on it and what other capabilities you give it.
I'm in the middle of designing just such a board right now. Totally recommend taking a stab at it if you have any EE chops at all (or want to learn!)
Lets just go with $50 and $20. If you're looking at that on top of the cost of a raspberry pi, comparing that to a super low-end Android phone, used, for something like $80-$100, is that really the way to go? The OS is different but termux has enough features, especially after rooting, that you can probably run whatever you're shooting for. Of course as a hobby, the parts that you find fun don't have to be the parts that I, or anyone else finds fun, so don't take this as me pissing in your cereal, it's more like there's the milk part and the cornflake part and so different strokes for different folks.
Interesting. I'm currently having great fun learning systems programming on the Allwinner A64, and never considered the option of building a board with one, assuming they are still available. Are you documentating your project somewhere?
What are the terms? It is not at all clear from the announcement. "part of this three-year licensing agreement", it _could_ mean the license cost is $1 billion, which Disney in turn invests in OpenAI in return for equity, and they're calling it "investment" (that's what's hypothesized above, but I don't think we know). Disney surely gets something for the license other than the privilege of buying $1 billion in OpenAI stock at their most recent valuation price.
Disney gets the opportunity to tell the board and investors that they are now partnered with a leading AI company. In effect, Disney is now an AI company as well. They haven't really done anything, but if anyone asks they can just say "of course we're at the forefront of the entertainment industry. We're already leveraging AI in our partnerships"
I think they read the title but not the article and assumed Rust was being removed, and (rightfully, if that were true) opined that that was a shortsighted decision.
Even Netflix got sued over a Black Mirror spinoff that used the phrase. They countersued to invalidate the trademark; the suit was settled under undisclosed terms. I would love to know how that went down and why there wasn't an obvious path to success for Netflix...
You jest, but that's how my sister gets through life, and it's always fascinated me.
She's incredibly intelligent, but more importantly she's a phenomenal social networker. She always has someone to call to ask about any question or solve any problem that comes up in life, and she's great at connecting these people with each other when they have problems of their own - so they all want to help her with whatever she needs, just to gain access to a pool of people they themselves can talk to.
What do you do with a skillset like that? I honestly don't know - something in leadership, probably, something where finding the right people and setting them to work is the most important skill of the job.
That wasn't in jest. I worked in a place where this was a norm. Nothing was properly documented, instead everyone would just ask and answer questions on chats; somehow, this actually kept velocity high.
Found it really hard to adjust to that. I'm the kind of person that prefers to research things on my own, find hard references and understand context. But there, this was the wrong approach.
Well that sucks. It's exactly the site that comes to mind when I think "most popular alternative to HN".
I've generally found conversation there to be more respectful than HN, rather than less, when discussions get heated - so I had high hopes it would be a different site, but alas.
This leaves a really bad taste in my mouth.
Edit: you know what, screw it. In the spirit of "no more self censorship", here's the link: https://lobste.rs/~7u026ne9se
I don't find the conversation to be especially disrespectful. The people in the thread in question attempted to shame him, to some extent. Shame is a social measure to coerce people who are behaving contrary to society's expectations to change their behaviour. However, while shaming him, they did not especially resort to childish name-calling or ad hominem. They reasoned with him extensively as to why his behaviour was deeply undesirable. He went so far as confessing that he did not even know the language of the PR he submitted, yet intentionally withheld information about the provenance of the code. Sometimes the shame mechanism is misused for things that should not be shamed, but this seems like a clear case of shameful behaviour that deserves social repercussion.
Sadly, it seems like nothing was learned, since he settles only for diminishing his culpability in anti-social behaviour. He goes so far as to describe, in his blog post, his code as an "AI-assisted patch". When you profess that you don't even know the language of the code that the LLM generated, there is no "assistance" about it, you're at the deepest end of vibe coding. And in submitting it to an open-source project, you're making a maintainer spend more time and effort reviewing it than you did prompting it, which is not sustainable. Moreover, if the maintainer wanted a pure-LLM-generated solution, there was nothing stopping them from hopping over and typing in a prompt themselves.
In fact, most of the comments were purely a debate with no direct attacks at all. The extent of "not respectful comments" I see are something like...
So your original comment that you "didn't want to hype up AI" was a lie, you really just wanted to pretend it was your own work and didn't want the project to be able to make a choice about it. There are good reasons why projects may not want to accept code generated by AI. They may not care. But by consciously choosing not to disclose that, you took that choice away from the project. That's pretty lousy behavior if you ask me.
"Pretty lousy behaviour if you ask me" is incredibly tame. If that's what counts for toxicity, then you're advocating for a toxicly positive carebear forum where nobody is allowed to criticise anybody else's decisions.
I agree that the discussion doesn't seem to be toxic on the whole, though not superb, although I don't know what happened following in terms of harassment, so that's up in the air for me.
Edit: just saw your edit, sounds like we're on the same page!
reply