Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | int32_64's commentslogin

Crypto markets won in the sense that every single asset class can somehow trade like a memecoin now.

Fun Fact about the Great Depression - RCA is the Poster-child of exuberance and Tesla has had a higher PE for >2 years.

Meme stocks might coincide with meme coins - but I don't know if it's fair to blame crypto for everything.

I think the reality is that - for whatever reason - people are willing to take on MUCH greater risk today for reward than they were prior to the pandemic.

I don't think we can blame crypto for everything. Sure, maybe you could say crypto has been meme-ing since 2017 - 3 years before the pandemic. But we've seen plenty of speculative bubbles like that - if it even was one.

Crypto didn't really start meme-ing with clearly bullshit NFTs and meme coins until the exact same time - 2021 - when Dogecoin et al have meteoric rises coinciding almost exactly with all the meme stocks.

I think this is actually one the best meme indicators: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dogecoin/doge/btc/

The Japanese Asset bubble was by far the biggest bubble of all time - and it lasted nearly 6 years. The Nifty 50 was a 7 year bubble, nowhere near this big. So, we might be in a bubble - but if we are - it's getting close to being the biggest, longest one ever.


dogecoin has tail emission vs bitcoin which has a finite emission. that is also something to consider. Maybe better to compare market caps? Dunno. Also, over time we have seen the development of more non-doge memecoins.

The hype around physical silver has been astounding in 2025 and so far in 2026.

I have nothing to back this up, but I believe a group of investors learned from cryptobros just how easy it is to pump and dump with social media and scare tactics, and here we are. Somebody please correct me.


I might be cynic and consider that other side in media have no marketable skills and other side is there just to get their name out so they can find a few suckers to give them money manage. Or they have something to sell like courses and seminars. Or it is free publicity for them. Pandering to various fields is likely profitable, be it cryptobros, goldbugs, silverstackers, hard money advocates, doomsday preppers, permabears or those believing in astrology I mean technical analysis...

Bots interacting with bots? Isn't that just reddit?

America expects its citizens abroad to file taxes, and it strong-armed its allies banking systems into compliance nightmares to ensure extra-territorial enforcement of American laws.

If America wants to pressure countries over their extra-territorial enforcement of censorship laws it should repeal its taxation requirements of Americans not living in America.


That analogy would make sense if Ofcom was proposing to enforce UK rules only on UK citizens living in the US.

The main point is that America demands aggressive compliance with its laws from allies outside of US jurisdiction, and making a law that says other countries can make no demands of the US will frustrate the relationship between nations, especially during a time when America is seen as particularly aggressive, like placing heavy tariffs on its closest allies.

Is that the point? Seems to me that if US citizens abroad pay taxes, they should be entitled to US government protection from censorship.

GDPR is leveraged against companies for European citizens living in other countries.

Perhaps nobody wants to have the uncomfortable conversation that AI is making the competent more competent and the incompetent less competent, because it would imply that AI provides brutally unequal benefits. The AI haters don't want this discussion because it would imply AI has any benefits, and the AI lovers don't want to have this discussion because it would imply the benefits of AI aren't universal and will increase inequality.


I want to see an example of this. Any real example. So far what I’ve seen, I wouldn’t give my name to any of those barely usable code, and most of the time they were even slower, especially when they pretended that they reviewed their code. And even with reviews they happily accepted bad code. This was true even with my friends, not just random examples on the internet.

I still need to understand every single line of the code to be responsible for it, and that takes the majority of time anyway, and quite often I need to rewrite most of it, because average code is not particularly good, because most code wasn’t produced by senior professionals, but random people making a random python script with only Hello World under their belt. So at the end doesn’t really matter whether I copy paste from a source, or an LLM does the same.

I understand that many coder are happy with the “John made his first script in his life” level of code, but I’m paid well because I can do better, way better. Especially because I need to be responsible for my code, because the companies to whom I work are forced to be responsible.

But of course, when there is no responsibility, I don’t care either. For those home projects where there is exactly zero risks. Even big names seem to use these only to those kind of projects. When they don’t really care.


I'll start by saying that in my past life I was a PM, and from that angle I can very much see how people writing code for large-scale, production systems take real issue with the quality of what LLMs produce.

But these days I run a one-man business, and LLMs (currently Claude Code, previously GPT) have written me a ton of great code. To be clear, when I say "great" I don't mean up to your standards of code quality; rather, I mean that it does what I need it to do and saves me a bunch of time.

I've got a great internal dashboard that pulls in data from a few places, and right now CC is adding some functionality to a script that does my end of month financial spreadsheet update. I have a script that filters inbound leads (I buy e-commerce brands, generally from marketplaces that send me an inordinate amount of emails that I previously had to wade through myself in order to find the rare gem). On the non-code front, I have a very long prompt that basically does the first pass of analysis of prospective acquisitions, and I use Shortcut.ai to clean up some of the P&Ls I get (I buy small e-commerce brands, so the finances are frequently bad).

So while I can't speak to using LLMs to write code if you're working in any sort of real SaaS business, I can definitely say that there's real, valid code to be had from these things for other uses.


One of my friends did a job for a government. He generated the code for it with some LLM. It provided a result which was about what he thought should be. He - or anybody - never checked the code whether it really calculated what it should have. “It did what [he] needed it to do”. Now the said government started to make decisions based on a result which proved by nobody. In other words, lottery.

What you mentioned doesn’t mean anything until there is no hard proof that it really works. I understand that it seems to you that it works, but I’ve seen enough to know that that means absolutely nothing.


Thanks, I can relate to the parent poster, and this is a really profound comment for me. I appreciate the way you framed this. I’ve felt compelled to fact check my own LLM outputs but I can’t possibly keep up with the quantity. And it’s tempting (but seems irrational) to hand the results to a different LLM. My struggle is remembering there needs to be input/query/calculation/logic validation (without getting distracted by all the other shiny new tokens in the result)


I don't know if it's as nuanced as this.

Just seems like it's dependent on what you're working on and what training data is available for it.

AI definitely just spews out python and JavaScript for me to do all sorts of things quickly.

But it can't translate my XNA game to JavaScript worth a damn. It's terrible with visual work as well.


"Not only were the colours and patterns unusually fine, but the clothes that were made of the stuffs had the peculiar quality of becoming invisible to every person who was not fit for the office he held, or if he was impossibly dull."


Is there any way to provide a service where an image manipulation bot is mentioned in social media replies and it doesn't lead to total chaos?

From what I saw the 'undressing' problem was the tip of the iceberg of crazy things people have asked Grok to do.


> Is there any way to provide a service where an image manipulation bot is mentioned in social media replies and it doesn't lead to total chaos?

It may be a failure of imagination on my part, but I can't imagine a bot limited to style transfer or replacing faces with corresponding emoji would cause total chaos.

Even if someone used that kind of thing with a picture from an open-casket funeral, it would get tuts rather than chaos.

> From what I saw the 'undressing' problem was the tip of the iceberg of crazy things people have asked Grok to do.

Indeed. I mean, how out of touch does one have to be to look at Twitter and think "yes, this place will benefit from photorealistic image editing driven purely by freeform natural language, nothing could go wrong"?


I'm glad I learned how to program when you could coax useful answers from Google searches.

Whenever a Stack Overflow result comes up now the answer is years old and wrong, you might as well search archive.org.


In the mid/late 2000s when the big social media sites were rising people posted harmless inane status updates about nothing, just testing out the potential of the technology. This eventually evolved into tried and true methods of earning engagement from the platform in the most cynical and exploitative ways possible, leading to things like the entire Buzzfeed clickbait journalism transformation.

You can't recreate how social media used to be because people know how to exploit it now, there's no going back. You couldn't recreate Google at the turn of the millennium with the PageRank algorithm because of how SEO was gamed, so it's obvious why these twitter clones keep stumbling reimplementing the same tech.


As the middle class continues to shrink in the West the gambling crisis will only get worse.

It has to be understood by older people that for many young people the only way to afford a lifestyle previously achievable in many cities with a basic job is to win the lottery.


Gambling addiction is a pretty certain way to become poor though.


The new age gambler logic would be if you know you can't afford a house through saving, the goal will always be out of reach, so you are already poor and will always be, so you might as well gamble. It's the age of "financial nihilism".


It's total BS though. If you have enough money to waste any significant amount on gambling, then you also have enough to save that same significant amount.

I don't think it's necessarily the worst thing if you waste like $10 a month playing the lottery, that's not why you can't afford a home. But if you're spending like $100+ a month gambling that is absolutely a big part of why you can't afford a home. Sure maybe you'll never afford a home in New York. Live elsewhere then. There does exist more modest housing. If you're working in a city earning too little to live there then you're doing the wrong thing. Move out of the city. Yes it is that simple, and no I don't give a shit if that's where you want to live. If you can't afford it you can't afford it. Gambling won't help.


There are two motives for gambling: one is to win but a bigger one is to harm yourself in a quasi suicidal mood. Gambling hides a state of depression.


Convenience won.

How many people are actually going to download a torrent client, navigate through some massive torrent file collection to check the files of the artists they want to download so they can upload mp3s to their phone over a USB cable like it's 2004 again, just so they can avoid paying Spotify?


A sufficiently seeded torrent is a high latency static CDN.

You just need a client that can make use of it.

I'm not sure if anyone will be interested in making one however, you can already get a patched Spotify APK from the usual mobile piracy spaces that's good enough.


Wasn't popcorn-time basically video streaming backed by torrent ? Why can't it be the same for audio ?

The metadata is 200 GB which can be easily indexed and could be made searchable, then you download only what you need


Now that's a cool idea.


> upload mp3s to their phone over a USB cable like it's 2004 again, just so they can avoid paying Spotify?

I do that not because I don't want to pay Spotify, but because it is more convenient. I want all of my music in one place (VLC), and Spotify doesn't let me export my library as OPUS or Flac. Some stuff in my library is only posted on SoundCloud, some are old mp3 recordings by friends, and another 30% are only on YouTube (small cover artists)


Great, so the copyright conglomerates have nothing to complain about if it's useless then.


> upload mp3s to their phone over a USB cable

The more interesting part is how this is your mental model of actually "physically" owning music.

The amount of messaging that will be needed to explain how home servers are convenient is pretty crazy.


And specifically, not everybody owns a NAS with 300 TB capacity. At 30TB drive for almost 1000€, we are talking about 10-15000€.

As mentioned in other stories, this is really welcomed by other big corps or LLM related companies


Datahorder here, a 26tb drive is about $375, so I don't think your quote of 30tb drive prices make sense. You can get about 80tb for $1000


In Germany the 30TB Ironwolf NAS edition is quoted € 975 on Amazon. The 22TB is € 719


Most people won't listen to 10tb of unique tracks in their entire lives, let alone 30tb or 300tb... 1tb of music is about a full year of 24/7 unique tracks


That's unnecessarily worst case. No one is seriously using a usb cable to upload mp3s. There are plenty of paid and free spotify clones anyone can throw up.


It's clear the endgame is to cook AI into Chrome itself. Get ready for some big antitrust lawsuit that settles in 20 years when Gemini is bundled too conveniently and all the other players complain.

https://developer.chrome.com/docs/ai/built-in-apis


"that settles in 20 years "

And at that point it will be a fight mostly between AI lawyers :-)


Which will settle it quickly under the watchful AI judiciary.


Two AI agents fighting couldn't end up in an infinite loop?


More billable hours.


Or seconds. Hours if there is a Cloudflare outage.



They meant the lawsuit will take 20 years to adjudicate, by which point it will be completely irrelevant.


We'll soon get Manifest V4 that, for "security reasons", somehow includes clauses banning any AI other than Gemini from using the browser.


That's too easy. It'll be more subtle. Compatibility MCP-Gemini for "security" so it slurps in more data from all the other AIs


And then a flat fee whenever anyone links-out from your proprietary, inescapable MCP backend. It's a legal free money hack!


That would suck. Is Google going to just eat all of this?


I'm not sure, all of my devices run a Firefox fork.


“For your safety and protection from potentially malicious and unverified vendors.”


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

Search: