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

i wouldnt go as far to say "its horrible".

i would never recommend it to someone who otherwise has a capable computer, of course, but it really isnt that bad. i gave it a pretty thorough test out of curiosity, and when they sponsored a few streamers i watch, it was totally fine. with the caveat that you have a decent internet connection and its probably not good for twitchy games like counter strike.

and, as far as i know, there is limited support for modding and some unsupported workarounds.


And it works on the Vision Pro via the next update.

finally!!!

Can’t wait to try that and for the f1 stuff to come out.


>Pointing out that a man who has achieved financial freedom decades ago may have different priorities than present and future wage slaves isn't attacking the man.

saying he has no empathy, and has never had empathy, on the other hand...


>How is this different than any company that uses the open source software?

recognition for the authors, which can lead to all sorts of opportunities. "netflix uses my X for their Y, worldwide" opens doors.


Can you cite an actual example of a FAANG company using X for Y that is also primarily attributable to a single developer? That is, someone who can say "uses my X"?

Not a community-developed project with a lot of contributors, but a software that would realistically qualify as being mostly attributable to one person?

Redis is an easy example, but the author of that doesn't need to say "Netflix uses my X" because the software is popular by itself. AI being trained on Redis code hasn't done anything to diminish that, as far as I can tell.


>Can you cite an actual example of a FAANG company using [...]

FAANG specifically? no, i am not familiar with their entire tech stacks.

but i have leaned on my single-developer projects (being used in other, not owned by me, software) to help land consulting gigs.


it has never been my explicit goal. but i have certainly enjoyed the rewards of recognition (e.g. i was able to lean on a successful project of mine to help land a nice consulting gig) and it would be silly to ignore that.

(edit: the comment i replied to was edited to be more a statement about themselves rather than a question about other developers, so my comment probably makes less sense now)


>What makes this more objectionable than profiting off open source projects by using it directly?

i can brag if netflix is using my X or facebook runs all their stuff with my Y. that can help me land consulting gigs, solicit donations, etc.


This is an edge case in OSS. Even among software packages used by Netflix and Amazon, few of them were attributable to a single maintainer or small group of individuals. They've long since become community developed projects.

Netflix and Amazon use many packages of all sizes. And contributions to projects with many contributors helped people get jobs.

How would you even know that Netflix or Amazon uses your package?

Their open source software depended on or derived from your package. They included your copyright notice with software they distributed. Someone contributed code. Someone reported a bug. Someone requested a feature. Someone mentioned it at a conference. I could continue.

arguments are stronger without insults

Anyone who knows anything about Carmack knows that he has trouble empathizing. I don't even think it's his fault per se. I'm fairly sure he would actually agree with the assessment. His raw intelligence is sky-high.

And that is a big reason why he's making this post, is what I'm saying. It doesn't excuse him, but it's not surprising in the least.


> Anyone who knows anything about Carmack knows that he has trouble empathizing.

Can you give some examples, outside of this post? I only know about Carmack by the things he'd worked on, but not anything personal like this. This would help me get a more complete picture of him.


I'd read Masters of Doom (the psych eval/juvie story and the cat story stand out). You might think "oh he was so young back then", and it's true, but keep in mind that book details id Software up to and including Doom 3 development, and he was in his early 30s there. I'm sure you can find excerpts if you don't want to read the whole thing. It's an interesting book though; great glimpse into trenches of 90s game development.

I've (unoriginally) always been impressed by his technical ability and work ethic, and while I used to religiously read his .plan updates (you might not know what that is, because I'm an old, OK? It's the precursor to blogs) and also follow the old Armadillo Aerospace development blogs, and watch the very long QuakeCon talks, I haven't kept up much as I got older, just come across things here and there (like this Twitter post), and I have not picked up a big change in demeanor or humility in regards to labor, political and societal issues from back then, and those are things he's written about. It's very much objectivism, the criticism of which is beyond this topic, but suffice it to say it's not a philosophy conducive to empathy. I seem to recall he made a bunch of libertarian rants on Facebook when he worked there too, but I'm not going to give Zuck the traffic. I'm sure you can find some.


true/false and insult/not insult are two different axes.

>Gotta give it to Zuck.

if "it" is the middle finger, for sure. "terrifying" is a great choice of word for it.


I was equally impressed/terrified by Apple's marketing blitz around client-side-scanning. So many people got paid to advocate for that, and the community barely convinced them it was a bad idea. There's not much hope left for any of FAANG deliberately resisting surveillance.

Why would they resist surveillance? They're making massive profits from it.

Well they can profit from that so why resist if ordinary user usually cares only about colors being pretty and Instagram/tiktok/x/your slop generator of choice working properly.

one thing to consider is how just the optics of major players using e2e was an overall benefit.

people who otherwise would have gone their entire lives without ever hearing about encryption were exposed to the term and the marketing convinced them that encryption and privacy was a valuable thing, even if they didnt fully understand the mechanisms or why e2e might not necessarily be very effective in specific circumstances.

later, when presented between option a and option b, where one has encryption and the other doesnt, they are more likely to choose the one with it ("well, if instagram and facebook use it and say it is good...")


And Big Brother realized this optics was a mistake.

If someone's given the choice between say Instagram and IRC, and chooses Instagram because they heard it has E2EE, that's a loss.

perfect is the enemy of good, etc etc.

between signal and plain text, it is easier to convince friends to use signal if they see positive marketing about encryption on other popular apps they use. it is easier to convince them to encrypt their backups before uploading them to their google drive. hell, its just a good conversation starter to introduce encryption/online privacy to people that never really think about it. that type of thing.

those same friends are not going to use irc regardless. not really a loss if it was never even on the table.


unfortunately, since the messaging/trend isnt "we are against privacy" (it is "we are protecting children, which reluctantly means we all have to sacrifice a wee bit of privacy"), it is really hard to fight back without being labelled as someone who is against protecting children.

but the advice is basically the same as it always has been:

- talk to your friends and family about it. do it with passion, but without hyperbole or conspiracy or aggression. any person you can convince to care is a win. organize with like-minded people.

- talk to your representatives in government. vote for representatives that are pro-privacy (when possible). convince your like-minded friends and family to do the same.

- to the greatest extent possible, dont purchase/use products/services which are facilitating the trend. (but, you also need to be realistic or you will burn out! and that is a bigger loss overall).

- if you are a decision-maker at work, or have any sort of input, leverage it as best as you can to make pro-privacy business decisions. however, similar to the above point, recognize that you still need to be realistic and dont get yourself fired arguing some decision. it is better to make 1,000 nudges in the right direction than it is to be fired/burn out trying to make 1 big nudge.

- support organizations that align with your beliefs. this can be monetarily, or by volunteering, or by spreading awareness of the organization itself. for example, many people have never heard of the electronic frontier foundation and have no idea what they do. lots of people dont know of the ACLU either (or, maybe they have heard the name, but dont know what they do or why it matters).


>unfortunately, since the messaging/trend isnt "we are against privacy" (it is "we are protecting children, which reluctantly means we all have to sacrifice a wee bit of privacy"), it is really hard to fight back without being labelled as someone who is against protecting children.

That's not what I am seeing on the ground. Many discord users I have seen talk about this issue frame this as an attack on freedom and privacy by hiding it behind the same narrative that has been used so many times before of protecting children. You can only push fake narratives so far until people start getting the message that people are hiding nefarious attacks on society behind fake movements.


>Many discord users I have seen talk about this issue frame this as an attack on freedom

good! ideally, someone is helping them organize and action those thoughts and feelings outside of whatever discord channel you are in.

i am referring to how it is being framed by the people pushing the agenda. age verification laws (as an easy example) arent being advertised as "we want to spy on you", they are being advertised as "this will protect children from harms".

talk to debbie in accounting instead of babmorley420 in discord, and ask her opinion. she is not likely to frame it as an attack on privacy/freedom. she is likely to frame it as a necessary sacrifice for the greater good. and her opinion also matters, she also votes. we need to convince the debbies of the world -- they outnumber the babmorley420s


Agreed. What I meant to say is at least the younger generation are starting to see past this smoke screen more so now than maybe 20 years ago.

Now if only they actually went out and voted...

that is very refreshing to hear.

i teach tech in college and just earlier today made a post about how i am not seeing the same when i compare my current students to students 5, 10, or 15 years ago. i hope that i am the one in the bubble.


I'm part of a community around the stop killing games initiative. So maybe it's a bit slanted because most might be pc gamers (technically inclined). But it's a pretty big movement on this front and most of them see right through this. A lot of them don't like what discord is doing. Whether or not they'll put there money where there mouth is is another matter.

they have "personal" and "public" modes.

"personal mode" is (extremely briefly) described:

"Information requested and retrieved in a Personal tab is not shared with anyone else. No record of your activity is recorded on BitTorrent. Use Personal tabs for logging into social media and other accounts. Also use them if you do not want to be associated on BitTorrent with any of your browsing activity in Ceno."

i wish the faq had even the tiniest bit of information on how this works, but it does not. they probably use their "injectors" to proxy the data or something. i am guessing it is discussed in more detail somewhere in the whitepaper (https://gitlab.com/equalitie/ouinet/-/blob/main/doc/ouinet-n...) but i dont have the time at the moment to read through it.


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

Search: