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

Years ago, I considered your approach. Programmatically create a custom email address for each person I wanted to talk to.

Then I hit upon a simpler solution. Have one email address. Happily share publicly. And whitelist the sender's email addresses. Emails not in the whitelist go into a quarantine folder that I glance at once in a while.

It's almost equivalent in efficacy, but much simpler to implement.


I don't have a phone ringer anymore, but when I did whitelist-only is how I screened incoming calls. Your method for email sorting has the advantage of being reviewable (verse entirely blocking specific handles@) — and much easier to implement/maintain.

I wouldn't change the advice much. Learning fundamentals is still critical (data structures, algorithms, etc).

But I would add two things:

Learn to use tools like opencode. (It's a whole class of tools, and you're at an advantage over peers who don't know how to use them).

For any feature, make sure you can code it entirely without help from an LLM. You should still be able to read manuals, docs, etc to find what you need.


> When some of SCORE’s team members attempted to reproduce the data analyses of 600 papers, they found that only 145 contained enough details to do so.

...

> However, many of the failures might have been caused by the SCORE researchers needing to make guesses about procedures or to recreate raw data, Errington says.

Incidentally, this is not unique to the social sciences. Back when I did condensed matter physics, the same was true for both experimental and theoretical papers. The PIs were pretty open about it: Once they perfect a technique, they want to milk it for as many papers as possible. If they reveal too many details, others will be able to outpublish them.

(Yes, it sucked).


While it's relevant to the particular submission, this type of comment is thrown around way too often.

Me boycotting some company's product due to bad practices (slavery, etc).

Response: You know your boycotting isn't going to change anything, right?

Me: Yes, and ....? I'm not trying to change the world.

I don't use FF as some form of protest. It's just a browser I like more.

I'm not anti-AI the way much of HN is, but let's pretend I am. If I ban AI generated content on my site[1], I'm not trying to change the world. Just controlling my site.

Getting more to your sentiment: The world/Internet is a vast place. If even 1000 people think like me, it's more than enough. For a number of years I had valuable online interactions via BBS's with a population < 1000. As long as I get 1000 people, let the rest of the world burn!

It's like the constant "Emacs is dying" threads we used to have on HN, because the percentage of SO users using it kept dropping. When in reality, the absolute numbers kept increasing. Who cares if the world has moved on to VS Code? Emacs as an ecosystem was/is thriving!

[1] Assuming I live in a fantasy world where I can classify content accurately...


I think much of current day neuroticism can be attributed to insincere comparisons of genuinely normal trade offs (like AI) to slavery in the past.

I think people are so afraid to do a hecking racism that they start comparing any normal thing to racism. I also think there’s an incentive here: by comparing to racism they potentially gain some social status points like - I’m more morally superior to you because I didn’t do a hecking racism like you.

But it can backfire, like with your comment. People are catching up to how ridiculous this comparison is


Goo Gone is the way to go:

https://googone.com/original


Yup. No noxious fumes.

GitLab is for profit, isn't it?

I tried to focus on for-profit, but I'm just saying there's nothing wrong with non-profits either. In fact I don't think I consciously mentioned a non-profit but I might have.

> My point is: it's very, very, very hard to do this, especially with my set of interests

It is very, very, very hard because you're making it hard by insisting on finding a strong intersection with your set of interests.

Half the jobs I've had aligned well with my interests. They were also in the lower half of jobs I liked. The best jobs I've had were the boring ones. It turns out, there's a lot more to jobs than just what you work on.

The most important thing is to keep a roof over your head. Next is saving for retirement. And then there are things like work environment, the people you work with, team dynamics, the actual technical work, etc.

I've found that the most intellectually fun/challenging work was usually coupled with the most dysfunctional teams. It's likely just a coincidence, but it was a good lesson that other things matter at least as much.


It's a job. Not a tribe.

The role an employer plays in societies varies from culture to culture, but note that in many cultures, it is "just a job".


Yes, that's what people tell themselves to deal with it psychologically. That it's just a job, not a community, and you better not make friends in the workplace (despite spending majority of your life there). And that when you're unemployed, life just goes on, as if it doesn't mean much.

Like when a traumatised kid never loved by the parents concludes that life is harsh and love doesn't exist, so better be tough.


> Yes, that's what people tell themselves to deal with it psychologically. That it's just a job, not a community, and you better not make friends in the workplace (despite spending majority of your life there). And that when you're unemployed, life just goes on, as if it doesn't mean much.

That's a lot of stuff you're saying. Not what I'm saying.


Sure. Also the profitability of a company is just a number, and shareholders dividend is just fiduciary fictions, and company hierarchy is just arbitrary title attaching this or that person to this or that loosely defined role.

Drama is just in the head of people melted in the ambient narrative, sure.


> I refuse to cater to the "em dashes are AI" crowd.

I wrote a plugin for my blog that converts all hyphens (surrounded by whitespace) into em-dashes.

https://blog.nawaz.org/posts/2025/Dec/a-proclamation-regardi...


> Telling someone you did something that you actually didn't do isn't a gray area, it's a lie.

Pre-LLMs, various helper tools (including LSPs), would make code changes to improve the quality of the code - from simple things like adding a const specifier to a function, to changing the actual function being called.

No one insisted that the commit shouldn't have the human's name on it.


These are not anywhere near equivalent. The fact that you think they are is laughable.

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

Search: