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

The charts are particularly great.

I will say I'm afraid to use this style because Gemini seems to love it so much and therefore users will make assumptions about how the website was created.


Unless you're building apps for people who are also in tech, your users won't have any idea what UI styles different LLMs push.

That might be true for them to know it was AI. Which yes, was how I worded it. But not necessarily good enough for it to be differentiated from everything else.

For example, in the Bootstrap days everything looked like Bootstrap and users got used to that, even if users hadn't specifically heard of the CSS framework.


I think I could use those charts and still give my site its own look. I get the Bootstrap comparison though.

I meant to say it was NOT how I worded it!

Here's the context for the "abundance" reference, for those curious:

> I believe that AI could cure most major diseases in the next 5–10 years, greatly accelerate economic growth rates, create a world of abundance and empowerment, and usher in a renaissance of democracy and freedom.

Whether that matches your description of it, I'll leave for folks to decide for themselves.


>I believe that AI could cure MOST MAJOR DISEASES

This statement alone is enough for me to not take literally anything this charlatan has to say with any kind of seriousness. It is at its base so patently absurd a statement that reeks of typical SV brainrot, and I don't know whether it'd be better or worse if he actually believes in the shit he spews


I have high hopes for AI yet am hard pressed to envision said abundance trickling down to the common man. The diseases cured will be locked behind a paywall and a renaissance of democracy and freedom is laughable in 2026, let alone beyond.

Dario and his team are on top of the world. He is a good salesman, no doubt. The shareholders will eat well.


David Sachs wants to use government to punish people he disagrees with politically, like Dario.

He supported the Department of War's illegal actions against Anthropic.

He supported the Trump administration's temporary export controls against Anthropic, the first government-imposed pause.

He has said Anthropic has created a monopoly, implying that they should be broken up.

I don't take him seriously when he says he doesn't favor government action. He favors it when he doesn't like their speech.


this is like a real-world game of thrones episode.

poor Anthropic

A principled individual could dislike Anthropic and still not favor using government to punish speech.

Well you’re in the wrong place for that. Hacker News is mostly about showing how much smarter and more cynical you are than everyone else in the room, and attacking anyone who does actually have principles by accusing them of ulterior motives to justify your own inaction.

no apparently it's for forcing every single article to be somehow relevant to somebody's pet issue, and then used as a platform to comment on that pet issue to signal one's virtue for being principled

of course they can. but this article isn't even tangentially about punishing freedom of speech. it is you who are attempting to make it about that by dragging in unrelated issues.

This is not me putting some unrelated pet issue into this topic; to evaluate David Sack's post arguing against government regulation, it's entirely fair to examine whether he has been consistent. He hasn't. He supported a government-imposed pause on Anthropic because of his political disagreements with the CEO.

Your initial reply of "poor Anthropic" was vague, but I interpreted it as implying that we shouldn't stick to a principle given they are unsympathetic in some way.


Will someone please think about Dario?

You're being downvoted because you clearly have the wrong opinion. If you want upvotes here, please share a conspiracy theory about why the CEOs of AI companies might want to slow down.

It doesn't need to based in reality or even reasonable.


I haven't used a foldable. Is it hard to click on buttons, for example, that happened to be place down the seam? Or has that type of thing been long solved?

The seam doesn't really make a difference for clicking. It's really at the point of just being a large phone screen. It's certainly easier than interacting with elements on the edge of the screen.

It is if you hold it half-open like a book -- you can't get your finger into the middle. Apple has added some sort of support for this scenario in iOS that they were demoing for the Duo.

The product isn't out yet. I imagine there will be a setting for dock on left or right, if that's what you're referencing.

There is no AUMF, and I believe Congress already repealed previous ones?

I thought the remaining issues were a dispute related to the timing requirements in the War Powers Resolution, plus unsettled Constitutional law.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Milit...

The 2001 AUMF hasn't been repealed. It was used as recently as 2025 to justify attacks on Venezuelan ships.


It was 1991 and 2002 AUMFs that were repealed in December 2025. I appreciate the correction.

(That said, the 2001 AUMF hasn't been invoked against Iran.)


Which is completely insane. The Venezuelan ship attacks have zero to do with what force was authorized for. The AUMF was for the use of force against those responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Were people on the boats in Venezuela? No. Then it's not force authorized by that AUMF.

But Trump found a smokescreen to hide behind. And Congress is too spineless to impeach him for unauthorized use of military force. And here we are.


I think insurance companies might beat the regulators, in terms of incentivizing safer vehicles via discounts.

Which would then offset these monthly subscriptions by car companies.


why wouldn't the FSD company itself integrate into insurance? they have the error rate data which is king for insurance. seems like free real estate.

I think that's a smart point and seems likely to be attempted.

It presents interesting questions, though. Right now, insurance companies are incentivized to fight for their customer in court against the other driver because they don't want to pay out.

But if the FSD provider is also the insurer, they aren't a neutral party if the dispute is between whether FSD is to blame or if the driver is to blame. It could become adversarial, let's say if the data in the car shows the driver wasn't looking at the road at the moment of the crash and therefore wasn't ready to take over for self-driving.

There might be ways around this, but it's a challenge to overcome. I'd want my insurance company to protect me against my FSD provider, too.

(My point is complicated by the fact that liability coverage is separate, admittedly. My insurer might not want to pay out if I was driving drunk, for example.)


1. After reading this article, I'm going to hear this music https://youtu.be/KVdqwD_bcPs?si=qo_3_9yZWiW3zEQW&t=86 in my head the next time I'm waiting for a response from my LLM.

2. The author understandably takes issue with the 35 hours. But I do think it's wrong to confuse the time it takes with the number of lines it ultimately writes. To quote Blaise Pascal, "I would have written a shorter letter, but did not have the time."


Apple should have put these videos out at WWDC. It would not have spoiled anything; everybody already knew the folding phone was coming and they could have just said it was related to any large device.

Way too late for developers to tackle this now for the Duo release.


I remember that HN discussion, but it seemed to me from the outside that after that post they got Google as a sponsor and I just had assumed the community was rallying together for them a bit.

But I guess not.

Too bad, they seem like such good people. Not that they're dead or something but I don't think this was their ideal end state for Tailwind.


They got like 10 new sponsors, you can see it on their page. They are one of the top OSS projects in terms of revenue.

I can't recall any other OSS project that makes so much money and has nothing to do with infra/cloud.

They were making around $1M a year back when they complained about the revenue. A lot of Linux distros can only dream about such an amount of money.


$1M a year isn't a lot of money if you are paying for full-time employees.

They achieved $2 million revenue in the first 5 months of the first Tailwind UI release.[1]

They had a very good run for such a project.

[1] - https://adamwathan.me/tailwindcss-from-side-project-byproduc...


Right, and as a consequence lots of very important software (orders of magnitude more important than tailwind) does not have full-time employees. Good for them if they can manage it, but it's a gravy train.

Given how hard it is to build any form of financially sustainable model around an open source project I think we should actively celebrate anyone who manages to build a model that works, not dismiss it as a "gravy train".

I really just think they got lucky, I don't see anything to celebrate. It's like celebrating one of your friends winning the lottery - good for them, but it's not really an indication the system is working well at all.

9 years of work to "get lucky".

Again, lots of people put in 9 years of work and never get anywhere with it. The success tailwind has had is not a consequence of the work.

The success of tailwind would not have happened without the work.

Just because others have worked nine years without success doesn't mean you shouldn't get credit when you put that work in and are successful.


This was after they laid everyone off, so it was just Adam and Steve left. An they surpassed $2M a year in sponsorships a couple of months after that. They were not struggling for cash at all.

I'm not sure from "they could afford payroll because they laid everyone off" I would conclude that they weren't struggling for cash.

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

Search: