nashashmi

That is a rule for a good project manager. When work is simple, you don't need bright people. You just need average guys. But when work is cutting edge, you need very talented people.

I think the efforts on cutting edge works has been reduced and redirected to more market-dominating trends like LLM optimizations. This is a bet. Cut off the finger for a stronger arm. And I think this bet will fail. But I thought the same about this new Gemini after Bard, and boy I was wrong.

I am pessimistic. I hope I am wrong. In the age of AI, content websites are trying to find a new identity for themselves. CSS-Tricks are great resources for the tinkerer and imagineer. What kind of products and services can be offered to this niche? courses? ads? donation buttons? Nope. Innovation, maybe. Paywalled css tools like color palette, or smartArt type demos. The problem is that these tools require a dedicated staff just for billing, user support, and maintenance. Say 10% of the revenue goes towards the existing CSS tricks team. That is $20 million dollars worth of annual revenue needed. $10 per user. 2 million users. If they are lucky I expect them to get 300k users. That makes it $60 per user.

There is either going to be a layoff, a price increase, or I don't know.

I refuse to believe ADHD is (only) genetic. I am convinced it is induced and I know why. I have come to a nice 6 year period where ADHD was not present in its usual form. It drastically changed. It came back recently about 5 years ago. I know why it came back. And external factors are the reason. Those factors took a break for 12 years before resuming.

Yes there is a real possibility that AI will reduce energy consumption. But you can have both: curtailed AI usage + Energy-focused AI usage. Otherwise we are risking “short term pains” for future promises.

I hope you don't find my experiences as a guiding principle for your own decisions. Sharing on HN in the age of AI sometimes makes us tight lipped so you never hear the full story here.

I have seen others who took it and something changed in them. I have taken other psych medications for stuff other than ADHD. And I saw myself change. It made me less vulnerable and more protective. I sought stable situations rather than be open to new experiences.

The special care and privilege is how people back off and lay low around you. They don’t expose you to the full line of emotions they are feeling. They give you more time to come around. They give you less stress. It is the external awareness that has the benefits.

When you are protected from stressful situations, or you are deafened to excitement, you are like in a state of peace and preservation. Never growing. Just calm. Never encountering problems. Never finding solutions. Never developing. Medication gets you there, not fully but just enough that you learn and develop slowly.

All of those outcomes are totally understandable and imaginable. I don’t want to rail against medications. People find them to be of benefit and it is tough to say how their life would turn out if they didn’t have that.

But I also resist these ideas that I should be on medication. I know it dulls responses because I have seen people change. They become less exciting. And more robotic. And their adhd lasts longer unevolving. Think of it like the hulk who never had a chance to grow until he was on a different planet and remained hulk entirely.

Honestly your description of the medicine tells me I should try it, but I’m going to hold back. The benefits you describe are the sweet spot of what I need, even today.

But come again, I have excess anxiety and that is getting in the way of how I do things. And work only happens when in crisis mode. Or rather I should describe it as the stress of not doing a task overcomes the anxiety of doing the work wrong.

The reality is I need all of those emotional responses even though they come in the way. And I also need a healthier mind so that when anxiety (aka a brick wall) starts building up, I have mental tools on how to address it.

The privileges and extra care I mentioned are the responses other people give to your ADHD by backing off from putting you under pressure. Or demanding stuff in excessive form. Or the passes they give you for the stupid stuff you do. I didn’t get anything like this amd sometimes I wished I had. My mind would have been less traumatized and I would have had a greater ability to learn healthier responses.

I am so glad it works for you. I hope that one day you can have healthier responses to the anxiety you face. I hope we become stronger and less dependent on privilege and passes.

More reasons for regulation.

AI companies, LLM makers, AI solution providers, and AI users should be inexcusably responsible for any and all harms caused by their misaligned automations across the chain. This alone will encourage self regulation and fix a broken industry that has too long prospered on fail fast and break things to be more considerate of their actions.

The second form of regulation should be on excessive energy consumption. The US Department of Energy needs to declare energy to be a vital human resource, and exorbitant uses for computing to be curtailed. Bidding on energy prices should be restricted to the excess markets where free market dictates price. And supply will reduce availability.

Long term, this will put the right kind of pressures and halting of demand. It will slow down investment in infrastructure and increase investment in research and development. It will prioritize efficient AI uses over low quality trial and error.

But theoretically, what impact would you anticipate? I feel that the heat will be lost into the environment anyway so it wont eliminate deep sea life.

As a person with severe ADHD, who has never taken any medication, I find this study troubling. It uses statistical correlation to indicate causation.

People on ADHD medicine are also going through mental health treatments and get special care and privileges in society. At the same time, the effects of ADHD medication numb their responses and emotions to what seems outwardly stable and normal but deep inside it is an inhibitor of development.

So excuse me for saying so, but I don’t buy into the conclusions of this study at all.

> UI element come up, and ask the user whether they want to share their entire screen

Better yet, allow for a dock on the extended screen, that lists all apps that have feature support for another monitor. The dock will have an app to duplicate screen 1. However, Control of this dock will have to be done via mouse / trackpad, because touch is not available on second screen..

This feature uses an iPad with USB-C. The USB-C is connected to a docking station with a monitor Or just directly to a monitor. The iPad does not allow multiple desktops. It does allow a single monitor but only to show a limited number of apps, namely apps that have second monitor output requirements and feature support.

My biggest pet peeve with Apple using USB-C is this very incompatibility. It made super duper sense to allow docking station capabilities. It would have been well within the capability of the CPU and GPU. And it would have been a killer feature. Possibly even killing the need for macbooks, but definitely killing the idea of laptops.

I was referring to Google’s lawsuit on US government to refuse their subpoena. Google has agency to refuse by going to court and even publicizing the events against a gag order.

The difference is that local US companies have agency to refuse government overreach while Chinese companies are weaker in this regard. Chinese companies are more vulnerable to its govts pressure.

Because it is DeepSeek in China, they must have open weight models to be even partially acceptable to the world. I am sure many would balk at using a Chinese company if its products were not open source