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

Writing parsers by hand this way can be fun (and might be required for the highest performance ones, maybe?), but for robustness and ease of development you are generally better off using a parser combinator library.

> Our 30-year bender of putting our lives online and blurring the public and the private has finally ended: people don't want to be online, don't trust social media, don't really trust any media, and are living simple local lives with a small circle of friends that they get together with regularly in person.

That's a nice narrative, but its simplicity clashes with reality.


Alternatively, I guess you could also use really thin cables to carry the low voltage paths; and that act as fuses, if ever a lot of current at high voltage was flowing across them? But probably not very reliable both in regular operation and as fuses.

We have a Miele washing machine and a Miele dryer. Solid machines all around even after years of use.


Well, feel free to short Tesla.

(And I say that with conviction. https://hindenburgresearch.com/ are my heroes.)


What evidence is there for the 'dump' part?

Mr Musk is a strange fellow indeed, but he's not guilty of all the vices and sins. Just plenty enough of them.


I'd say more in Doge and Bitcoin but you could argue with his stocks even though they're announced/scheduled.

That’s a fair point, but a combination of “fake it ‘til you make it” together with extracting massive “compensation” before you actually make it amounts to pretty much the same thing.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/antoniopequenoiv/2024/05/31/tes...

> Musk sold 19.5 million Tesla shares worth about $3.95 billion in November 2022

I mean sure it is his to sell, but how is that different?


That was to buy Twitter.

You know that's the timeframe of the Twitter acquisition right?

Just wait a few years, all of this is still getting better.

It's not really - it's going in the inverse direction regarding how much more processed and artificially altered it gets.

Except it seems to be going in the opposite direction, every phone I've upgraded (various Androids and iPhones) seemed to have more smoothing than the one I'd had before. My iPhone 16 night photos look like borderline generative AI and there's no way to turn that off!

I was honestly happier with the technically inferior iPhone 5 camera, the photos at least didn't look fake.


If you can get raw image data from the sensor, then there will be apps to produce images without AI processing. Ordinary people love AI enhancements, so built-in apps are optimised for this approach, but as long as underlying data is accessible, there will be third-party apps that you can use.

That's a big IF. There's ProRaw but for that you need an iPhone Pro, some Androids have RAW too but it's huge and lacks even the most basic processing resulting in photos that look like one of the non-final steps in the post.

Third party apps are hit or miss, you pay for one only to figure out it doesn't actually get the raw output on your model and so on.

There's very little excuse for phone manufacturers to not put a toggle to disable excessive post-processing. Even iOS had an HDR toggle but they've removed it since.


"Better"...

"AIer"... Who even needs a lens or CCD any more?

Artist develops a camera that takes AI-generated images based on your location. Paragraphica generates pictures based on the weather, date, and other information.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/tech/ai-camera-images-paragr...


Thanks for the link, that's a very interesting statement piece. There must be some word though for the artistic illiteracy in those X/Twitter replies.

> There’s nothing that happens when you adjust the contrast or white balance in editing software that the camera hasn’t done under the hood. The edited image isn’t “faker” then the original: they are different renditions of the same data.

Almost, but not quite? The camera works with more data than what's present in the JPG your image editing software sees.


You can always edit the RAW files from the camera, which essentially means working with the same data the camera chip had to generate the JPEGs.

Not quite. At the very least, the RAW file is a static file. Whereas your camera chip can make interactive decisions.

In any case, RAW files aren't even all that raw. First, they are digitised. They often apply de-noising, digital conditioning (to take care of hot and dead pixels), lens correction. Some cameras even apply some lossy compression.


> As a result of this, if the linear data is displayed directly, it will appear much darker then it should be.

Then -> than? (In case the author is reading comments here.)


The author makes this error every single time, in both articles by him I've read today. For some reason, as a person whose native language is not English, this particular error pisses me off so much.

We should blame English's crazy spelling system, not the author.

'Immer' is just German for 'always' or 'eternal'. So giving that name to your library of persistent and immutable data structures is a fairly natural thing to do, without them having anything more in common than that.

(Of course, they might have more in common, I don't know.)


Immer is also a dutch word, with the same meaning as in german.

I would never translate “eternal” to “immer”, but rather “ewig”. “Always” is the corrent translation, imo.

Sure, though 'never' is a bit of a strong statement. It depends on context and what's idiomatic.

An example:

DE: Er schwor, ihr auf immer treu zu sein.

EN: He swore to be eternally faithful to her.


What am I supposed to do?

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

Search: