There's an incredible amount of value in simply not worrying if your car will run when you need it to. Cortisol is one hell of a drug.
In many cases it might be better for someone to go deeper into debt on the car if it means they will be able to focus and perform better at work. It might even be worth engaging with less scrupulous financiers. Stability in transportation unlocks a lot of opportunities.
People say buying used car is a lottery, but so is buying a new released car model. I've seen people having to send their brand new shiny car to the shop on a regular basis. The odds of getting a good experience are higher than blindly buying a second hand car with unknow history but not necessarily much better than buying a 20y old car (whose typical failure points are well known by that point) with complete documented history and knowing a good maintenance shop.
Usually buying a new car that already went to a facelift is your best bet as it means it has been significantly long enough in the market to get most of its early gremlins known and sorted.
Having said that I would now only consider buying a new car if I can pay it in one installment. I once loaned a new car and I regretted it immediately. Car was good but the amount I paid each month would have been better spent/invested elsewhere. I now drive a 20y old car that I paid cash last year. I checked before buying what were the main failure point (CVT transmission if not maintained properly) and bought a car with all the invoices and documentation checking it had been maintained properly and had her CVT oil changed. I expected a few things to fix (audio speaker, shocks) and negociated taking those into account.
The car drive very well, is spatious and comfortable, I could afford replacing it if it died suddently. I would only consider a new car if I decided to go electric but gas price would need to multiply by 3 at the very least. I've seen people going EV then back to gas when they realized that after ~8 years of use their EV needed a battery replacement whose cost negated any saving on gas. I think battery price needs to go down for more EV adoption. Nobody wants to buy a second hand EV if it needs a usd10-15k for a new battery and an EV becomes pretty much unsellable at this point without a replaced battery.
I think you greatly overestimate how many 8-10 year old EVs will actually require replacement batteries. Barring a few models with poor engineering choices, most cars will still have 80% of their capacity after 10 years and won't have the downsides of having a 10 year old ICE engine with a variable record of maintenance.
EVs that are 10 years old now will have a lower range than current models, AFAIK, so 80% of that might still be limiting. They will also be slower charging.
> There's an incredible amount of value in simply not worrying if your car will run when you need it to.
True, being able to know for sure you can get to work (or wherever important) is a huge peace of mind. And more than peace of mind, can be critical to remaining employed, etc.
A new car does not guarantee you that. I've had partners who are way more into new cars than me and those new cars have failed to be usable in various ways.
A brand new EV was in the shop for 3 weeks. Oops, can't go to work.
A near-new car had an ECU lock up so no way to start it. Call a tow truck to the dealer ($$$) and took a week ($$$$).
A near new EV had an EV-specific problem: it refused to charge. Car ran fine, but couldn't charge so only so many miles left. Drive to dealer, took a few days. At least warranty covered it.
> In many cases it might be better for someone to go deeper into debt on the car if it means they will be able to focus and perform better at work.
Going into debt for a car (a fast depreciating asset) is always a terrible idea. If you're super rich and can afford it, fine, have fun. But for anyone counting money, it's the second worst financial decision you can ever make (second only to carrying credit card debt).
Back to having reliable transportation, which is super important for most people.
Solution? Buy two used cars for way less than half of a new car which can still fail.
I only buy cheap used cars, but always have more than one available. Occasionally one needs maintenance and is out of commission for a few days. That's fine, I have another one (actually a few more, but even one more would do). All my cars put together cost no more than an average new car today. And insurance is way cheaper since they're all old beaters.
It's like servers. You can spend gazillion on the highest end server but it can still fail resulting in downtime. Or you buy a few cheap servers for redundancy and accept that failure is ok and redundancy is in place.
Oh, I read that quote the opposite way (wrongly, I think now) –
> > There's an incredible amount of value in simply not worrying if your car will run when you need it to.
> True, being able to know for sure you can get to work (or wherever important) is a huge peace of mind.
If you don't worry about it not because you trust it, but because you just think you'll take it as it comes and don't particularly care if it doesn't start one day, there's also a lot of value in that you could save a lot on used prices and servicing!
For me a loan would be far more stressful than fixing a 20 year old car, but I have worked for myself for 15 years so my priorities are probably skewed
There is some evidence that little engineering effort has been put into mitigating this problem. I think if someone actually tried really hard we could make these birds a lot quieter.
> We compared the detected power flux densities of this UEMR to that emitted by the first generation v1.0 and v1.5 Starlink satellites. When correcting for the observed satellite distances, we find that the second-generation satellites emit UEMR that is up to a factor of 32 stronger compared to the first generation.
I'm not sure when I would use something like this. My VS copilot already writes one-off scripts that use Roslyn to analyze code. I don't even have to prompt it to do this with gpt5.5+
C#/.NET feels unreasonably effective as a target for LLMs. The reflection and compiler services are not found anywhere else and have profound effects that HN still seems to be taking massive naps on.
They're good analogies. It's possible to keep a Jenga tower going forever, just extremely difficult once it reaches the point of being all middle pieces.
It's certainly not possible to keep a Jenga Tower growing forever. For each floor you add you need to leave at least one piece in a lower floor. Eventually you run out of pieces. It's possible to "complete" a Jenga Tower, but at that point it has to stop growing.
While I appreciate the creativity around using a game engine for non gaming applications, this does not seem like a particularly good fit.
If most of your problem is 2d window/text stuff, the web browser is probably the best foundation to work with. UI and hud functionality in COTS game engines is light years behind what chromium and friends can do today.
Agree on Chrome being top-dog in this space. Electron would've been the easy (pragmatic?) choice. But the design decision was to use Godot and not create yet-another-Chrome-Electron app. It's certainly not pretty to look at in its current state.
This is something I'm mainly working on it on my free time so figured why not see how far I could push things.
yeah, personally i think branching out and using something like a game engine for something like this is a fairly inspired choice. inspired meaning that it literally inspired me to immediately think “oh yeah, there really is a wider universe of UI stuff that can push good fps and not be electron”. so just for that alone i appreciate this project’s existence. :)
i will definitely be curious to see how you find that decision to be working out for you as the project evolves— will definitely be keeping my eye on it! actual refreshing, interesting take!
> When semiconductors were being researched at Bell Labs in the 1940s, mysterious component failures were eventually traced to researchers who had touched copper door knobs; the tiny number of copper atoms that migrated from the door to the workers hands was enough to ruin their work material.
Copper is incredibly destructive when it's in the wrong part of the fab. It's such a problem that most manufacturers typically separate it across physical cleanroom boundaries and use things like skybridges to move the wafers from one to the other. Once a lot touches the copper area, there's no coming back. It's basically a zombie virus.
Amazing and my further question: What degree of scientific discipline and/or stubborness would it take for the Bell Labs folks to actually get to the bottom of this and finally trace it back to the copper and the door knobs?
One of my professors in college was telling stories about finding out the reason yield dropped after lunchtime was someone eating salty potato chips and then going back to work.
The motivation seems easy though, wafers cost a lot of money! No one wants to see low yields. They are constantly testing and measuring everything to try and find root causes. Look at some of these diagrams if something can be isolated they try to do it.
You run split experiments over subsections of the line to find the source. It's essentially like binary search. You can do this pretty quickly with a skilled team.
If the demand for other fuels increases, the cost of diesel can be indirectly affected.
Jet fuel and diesel fuel come from similar parts of the barrel. Refineries can largely choose what kind of fuel they produce for a given unit of input. One barrel doesn't always split into the same fractions. There is configuration involved.
Even better, use some kind of local-ci runner that does deterministic builds from a dependency graph. No changes, no build, massive parallelism if you want it
> And potentially as a byproduct of enabling all of this, you can now slop your way to a one-shot 3D game over the weekend which looks impressive.
I think we've finally reached a weird point where AI has effectively reduced the amount of competition that real game developers have to endure.
Nothing unravels faster than a game project being built with AI. You can achieve impressive results in a day, but you can't get much further than that without actual talent. LLMs will never be able to best a human environment artist at scene composition, especially if that composition needs to be directed with nuance over time.
There's a huge difference between a game that looks impressive and one that feels impressive. You can only achieve games that feel like counter strike, call of duty and overwatch with thousands of hours of human sacrifice. The AI is almost pointless once you get to play testing and balancing. Knowing how much to adjust magical integers isn't a conversation a chat bot can resolve with endless pontification tokens.
These models aren't really LLMs -- they don't just operate on text tokens. They often include vision models and in some cases audio models. That means that they can better associate the meaning of images and words together so that when someone says "make this button blue" or "create a 3D model of a rocket" they have some level of understanding of what that is and what needs to be done.
The key question is how good that understanding is. For example, a model would likely have a good understanding of various named colours and hex values (e.g. from the HTML specs, X11 specs, and various colour comparison websites) such that it could reasonably correlate that to a CSS entry. It's not clear if/how well a model would identify that given an image, though it should be easy to generate a dataset of image to colour name and/or hex code for training and evaluation.
What's more interesting is whether these frontier models are at their core transformer models, whether they use residual streams to facilitate learning, and whether they are using some other as yet unpublished architecture that gives them an edge.
The coordinate system in game scenes is known as "world space", but that rarely means our world.
How do you train an LLM to create a world that only exists in an artist's head?
I think spending a day with just the lighting systems alone would alleviate us of any misunderstandings here. Getting lighting to work right isn't something you can solve by duct taping a vision model to the contraption.
Again, my issue with the statement is not about current LLMs. Who knows if LLMs cannot be a major component of AGI, or even ASI systems. Then the capability to do whatever humans can do is part of the definition.
>> And potentially as a byproduct of enabling all of this, you can now slop your way to a one-shot 3D game over the weekend which looks impressive.
Do these games really look impressive? Everything I've seen has looked like someone completely new to Unity/Unreal has slapped together a bunch of premade scripts and very poor 3d assets.
No, they don't. But to the layman they do. Most people are unaware that you can get what is to them an impressive 3d game scaffold from the Unity asset store in like one hour. You can literally have a 3d man running around an open world with camera, lighting, shadows, run animations, in like 5 minutes. This is a very impressive feat if you have no idea about modern game engines, which 99.99999% of people do not.
As an amateur game dev who knows some amount of things, honestly, not coping, I have not seen anything come out of AI game dev that would have been more than like one month of human dev work. And obviously, games take a lot more than one month to make...
Yep. Every single post I've seen about "game development is over" is yet another procedurally generated game. Not only it doesn't prove anything about Astra being "better" at making games (do people have any idea the sheer amount of open source games that do exactly that? You can find thousands of the same planet exploration games through repos, blog posts,etc. Game design schools have it as an exercise, that's how basic it is), but as you said: the wow factor of space exploration is cool, sure. It makes for a catastrophically boring game.
Leaves me to wonder whether the OpenAI glazers just never played games in their lives, or are just really superficial tech bros. Most likely, both.
Most of AI is being used to generate procedural content. It is impressive on the first video or first image, and it might look useful on the surface, but it gets grating quite fast.
In many cases it might be better for someone to go deeper into debt on the car if it means they will be able to focus and perform better at work. It might even be worth engaging with less scrupulous financiers. Stability in transportation unlocks a lot of opportunities.
reply