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

> they could just uninstall the problematic apps from the phone they already have.

… if you have root access with adb (assuming android, I don’t know much about iOS)


This stance is so anti-consumer it's laughable. Are you seriously implying LG doesn't turn a decent profit with their massive empire? There's an issue with capitalism of chasing infinite growth rather than stability, and this is one of the consequences of chasing such growth.

Explicitly choosing to help improve something by providing your data seems like an opt-in but what do I know these days

> We do not own the same copy of that book

Why not? If you hash the book, it’ll match. It’s word for word the same book (editions not withstanding). It’s not the same if you tie in account permissions, of course. Or is this on a philosophical level?

Edit: the downvotes make no sense, aren’t we talking about digital copies here?


Because property law is not defined in terms of hashes. Why would you expect that property law operates on a mathematical construct that was discovered centuries after it?

It's about how copyright law was originally conceived. It did not particularly care about what you did with the information, apart from when you copied it. Copyright is only about the right to make more copies of a work (hence the name!), it doesn't give you any particular rights on its own to what anyone does with any given copy of a work, such as reselling it. This has changed more recently with (first with software) the concept of buying a license to a work as the primary means of purchasing it, which is far more restrictive.

Two copies means two copies. I have a copy, my house burns down, your copy is fine.

Hashes have nothing to do with it.


If I buy a Billy book case from IKEA, is it not the same as your Billy book case?

Hashing said book case is left as an exercise for the reader.


It is a distinct physical object. Whether anyone stored digital information about it in a bit-wise manner, does not change that fact of a physical object being unique. The same book can not co-exist at the very same place and location and time in this universe. That makes no sense.

I thought we were talking about digital copies.

we may have been. the idea that two copies of the same thing are not the same object still applies. you can tell because if you own a PDF and I own a copy of that PDF, and I destroy mine, you still have yours.

Physical objects do not exist in a digital format. When I type the letter "a" is it not the exact same letter that you are using in your text? Even all the "a"s in this comment are identical, are they not?

In the physical world, no two letters "a" are exactly the same, not even printed ones.

Or do you suggest that all those letters "a" here are completely distinct from each other?

I don't think ownership works conceptually for digital stuff. There's no owning a letter "a" and there are no two letters "a" that are distinct from each other, unless you count the Cyrillic "а" which is completely different from "a".

Each of these letters "a" might be a different instance, but they are the same letter: "a". Similarly, two copies of a file are still the same exact copy. Just different instances of it.


Your comment is unique. Nobody before you has ever written a comment phrased exactly like that.

I saved a copy of your unique comment on my pocket supercomputer, including the letter "a". I didn't ask first; I just did it. It's fine because it doesn't really exist.

Now it's my comment.


exactly. delete all of the "a"s from your comment. what happens to theirs? nothing. because they're not the same thing.

are identical twins the same person?

Since when are people digital?

If I buy a game, and my friend buys a game, we can both own a copy of the game, without owning the same copy. My disc of Rollercoaster Tycoon 2 is not the same as my friend's disc of Rollercoaster Tycoon 2

I can sell my copy of the book to a third person without interfering with your copy. And I can do so without the involvement or permission of the publisher or book store.

games are actual physical bits stored somewhere.


I’m not denying that? What is the argument here?

that even if they form the same pattern, one pile of bits on one storage medium and another pile of bits on a different storage medium are two separate things and it's possible for one person to own one of the piles and another person to own the other one.

This is a bad faith argument and the commenter knows it

I for one am running what I can on my aging 1080Ti(!!), namely a Qwen2.5 14B (4-bit quantized). It’s not great, and the only other card I have is a 3070Ti but I need that for gaming. :(

What a terrible card that 3070Ti is. Mad regrets buying it because I wanted to save $400 compared to a 3080Ti.


I really don’t understand why this is being downvoted? Did I say something wrong / controversial? Or is it because I’m not using my resources the “optimal” way? Is it because my models aren’t open weight? I was only trying to contribute my experience :(


> If Google were to die they would die the way Yahoo did

This might be true 20 years ago where Google had one true product, Search. Since then, they have diversified and got their fingers a million pies.

I don’t think you can get true competition with the way MS,GOOG,AMZ have grown. You’ll get a duopoly, or maybe a triopoly.


The term "cartel" might be useful here.


You’re overly focusing on the IQ, and completely hand waving the structural advantages. You do not understand.


> This dude's car breaks down and he gives up on university?

It seems like you’re overly harsh on this dude. Being wealthy and well connected lets you circumvent the kind of stuff Chris had to go through. Bill didn’t even need to file for any kind of aid - he could focus on the one thing. That is a luxury most people don’t have. I think if Bill was born to a poorer family and had to work part time jobs to keep the lights on, things would be very different.


It even almost reads like “Borges”, at least on the top. The design is remarkable.


You spoiled it for the OP, to whom we were trying to give hints ;)


Oh crap, not my intention!


Epic bought bandcamp many moons ago. Did they enshittify it or is it still going strong?


Epic actually sold Bandcamp 3 years ago. I only started using it lately so I can't say how it was before, but I think it's still good.

https://pitchfork.com/news/epic-games-sells-bandcamp-amid-la...


Unfortunately bandcamp laid off virtually all of their engineers a month or so back: https://www.hypebot.com/new-bandcamp-layoffs-why-artists-are...

So, not enshittified, but either abandoned or headed for ensloppification.


Did they only recently release access to a new streaming API or did I dream that (again)?


I've been using it sporadically over the past 10+ years and have not noticed any major changes, at least for my limited use.


Thanks, I did some digging. My biggest issue is Andrew Jervis not running Bandcamp Weekly anymore. I loved that show :(


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

Search: