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

It introduced vocabulary well enough though? I get that the specifics were all apocryphal.

> March: ok, let’s also get everyone else onto Claude Code or Claude Cowork every single day

May I ask what you’re making that somehow is improved by turning everyone into chat bot controllers?


There was/is a believe that more folks can unblock themselves with access to AI. There is some truth to this. Our product managers and sales folks are achieving more with Claude and MCPs pointed at tools they use.

The downside, however, is they are also unknowingly digging themselves into holes. For example, we have AI-generated skills that are thousands of lines long and include Python scripts with hundreds of lines of tests. Some of these Python functions are literally just emitting MCP tool names.


“Absorbs” volatility might be more accurate.

I will resist the urge to inquire about the difference between reducing and absorbing.

I won't. What's the difference here between resisting and absorbing volatility?

Not a financial expert, but i think reduce implies it goes away, and absorb implies it’s still there but someone is taking it up.

Like reducing the amount of water on the floor would be turning off the tap. Absorbing the amount of water on the floor is when you mop it up.


Or to bring it back to the original context... Reducing volatility would be reducing the impact of bad weather on your harvest, absorbing volatility is finding someone to cover your losses. (presumably by giving up some profits on the good years. It's like a financial low pass filter)

That’s exactly what I meant. I was only replying to the question as posed.

Volatility is a natural consequence of weather, blight, etc., etc.

To reduce volatility you would need to actually stabilize the supply of onions.

What futures do is allow traders to shift risk from the future to the present. By pricing that risk, it's possible for people who depend on onions to pay a little more now in exchange for a guarantee about the future.

It's not magically going to make onions less volatile (although high risk prices can spur investment which might) but it can reduce disruptions caused by volatility.

The classic example of this is futures on jet fuel which allow airlines to weather random wars in the middle east, OPEC shenanigans, etc. Ticket prices are higher this way, but the existential threat of being forced to cancel a bunch of flights is gone.


Oh you’re talking supply volatility, where most of us are talking price volatility.

As long as demand remains inelastic, the two are the same.

If there is a supply shortage prices will rise; no amount of futures trading can create resources out of thin air.


> The San Francisco Onion Futures Company is not a board of trade, defined as an "organized exchange or other trading facility".

I hate to argue but then what would they define this as, if not an organized exchange or other trading facility?


7 USC § 1a(37) defines an "organized exchange" as

> [A] trading facility that— (A) permits trading— (i) by or on behalf of a person that is not an eligible contract participant; or (ii) by persons other than on a principal-to-principal basis; or (B) has adopted (directly or through another nongovernmental entity) rules that— (i) govern the conduct of participants, other than rules that govern the submission of orders or execution of transactions on the trading facility; and (ii) include disciplinary sanctions other than the exclusion of participants from trading.

And 7 USC § 1a(51)(A) defines a "trading facility" as

> [A] person or group of persons that constitutes, maintains, or provides a physical or electronic facility or system in which multiple participants have the ability to execute or trade agreements, contracts, or transactions— (i) by accepting bids or offers made by other participants that are open to multiple participants in the facility or system; or (ii) through the interaction of multiple bids or multiple offers within a system with a pre-determined non-discretionary automated trade matching and execution algorithm.

(7 USC § 1a(51)(B) then follows with some exceptions to that definition.)

In short—an "organized exchange" is defined as a type of "trading facility". To count as a trading facility", whether of the "organized exchange" type or not, you must either accept bids or offers from other participants yourself or else deterministically match and execute those bids and offers.


I think their point is there's no "peer to peer" trading so it's not an exchange. You're always contracting futures with them, so it's more like a vegetables seller than a trading facility.

Exactly right. You're able to privately resell contract keys (and the buyer can then re-issue a new key with their delivery info, voiding the old one), but onionfutures.com doesn't facilitate it.

I mean, it kind of does, though, no? Since it is backing the contract in the first place? Why else would anyone buy those contracts if they didn't know they have value provided by onionfutures.com in the first place? Why can't I just sell a fake key, claim it'll work, and make unlimited money this way if that wasn't the case?

The specific laws do not actually ban the transfer of those contracts (tbf this is very complex and depends on your reading). And yes they do not facilitate the trading of the instruments in the secondary market but they absolutely facilitate the instruments themselves otherwise there cannot be a secondary market without any backers of the instruments.


See FBT's comment below, it's about matching or being on both sides of the trade.

Between CBOE and OCC, that’s (exactly?) how options trading works as well, and I don’t think anyone claims that CBOE is not an exchange.

Broker or dealer. Per the interwebs, a broker acts on behalf of another party, vs a dealer trades for themselves.

As distinguished from an exchange, where the exchange intermediates and becomes a middle party "simultaneously" to both sides.

The market dynamics are pretty different between broker dealers and exchanges. For instance a /ticker/ as a concept makes sense only with an exchange.

The exchanges basically pick up only the contracts or goods with the most volume and standardized & predictable goods.

To trade more exotic or niche things basically you have to find your own counterparty, versus the exchange acts as an "typical" buyer and seller to each side (assuming there is anyone there at all to participate on each side... giving rise to the concept of market makers who undertake to do just that, i.e., to be ready to trade either side at any time in a certain good).


Legal defense is basically "nuh uh"


Once you have the concept down of not doing anything to further itself but merely existing in the time and place, which is called reflection, you can expand (not travel) to contemplation, a different experience.

Are we still talking about testing for autism?

I should have known better than to try an analogy here

Artificial intelligence is a lot like alternative medicine, if it was the thing it said it was it wouldn’t need a name.

How much land, time, and money, per citizen, would it take to put down enough solar cells to generate each person's basic electrical supply? Is it less than $5K?

It looks like solar can already power about a third of American household demand, and is on track to get to two thirds within five years [1]. (Commercial and utility is leading the acceleration, even into Q2 2026.)

That said, we're hitting 2030 with ~20% of American electricity coming from solar and wind versus 40 to 60% under the IRA baselines. We may wind up in a long-term spiral where our adversaries have not only more manufacturing capability and structurally lower labour costs, but structurally cheaper energy, too.

[1] https://seia.org/research-resources/us-solar-market-insight/


I looked into this living in Japan and tired of the electric bill after running AC 24/7 for three months when it's 35 degrees at 65% humidity.

$5500 in solar panels including a battery would be just enough to keep the AC on all summer, and that's being fairly high on the temperature, around 26.

So based on cost alone and not power draw, with the AC off you could comfortably power a fridge, PC, and water heater, I guess? But I'm talking out my ass here


I live in a 160m2 (1700 sqft) house in Northern Europe (54N). 10kWp of solar on my roof generates around 1/3 more than I consume over the year. Everything is electric, I don't have natural gas. I have a heat pump for heating and cooling (rarely gets above 30c here). If I had a battery April - September could all be local consumption (I pull around 5kWh from the grid each day).

The issue is winter: It gets down to -25c and there is very little sun (not that it would help due to snow on the panels). In January and February this year I generated a grand total of 5kWh :D

However my house is a new house, it's designed to modern building standards and has 30cm of PIR insulation in the walls and even more in the roof. There's just no way to properly renovate old buildings to be like that without basically rebuilding the whole thing. The actual cost of materials is not expensive though (for the west). In milder climates (UK I'm looking at you) there's really no reason all new houses cannot be net-zero.


Modern building standard constantly changes. Time will show, how good they are.

Meanwhile, we have, in Europe a lot of buildings from late 19, early 20th century that are perfectly habitable today and often are ruined by modern standards that not respect old standards. For example basement addition that prevents the apartments from “breathing” and causes them to become damp.


I have done a grid based setup at my house in India and it cost us close to 3k for a 5kw setup with 4 acs. Planning for a complete off grid solution once the efficient panels like hjt and sodium cells become common place. Right now we have acid batteries and they are not very comfortable to handle.

Converting Sun to electricity to power a water heater is suboptimal. The water can be heated directly by the Sun. If you can put a water tank above the solar panel, you don't even need a pump.

This is true.

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

It is also true that solar water heating has unpleasant failure modes.


From a purely efficiency standpoint, yes, but practically, electricity->heat is a lot cheaper to install. Plumbing is messy, and bolting on a water circulation system to a roof is harder than delivering more joules over the wires.

Having gone through one ice-dam related roof leak in the past, I'm also not thrilled with the idea of superheated liquids hanging out casually above my bedroom while I sleep.

If it powers a heat pump water heater, it's pretty efficient, and much less plumbing involved.

Our house is all-electric. We have a 60 panel, 24 kw array that would probably cover all of our needs if it weren't shaded in the afternoon, and we have a real winter here, so the heat pump runs hard, and we use a substantial amount of electricity. About 1250 square feet of panels in total. Equipment costs about $20k-$30k in the US, not including batteries or electrician install. The actual array was pretty easy to set up.

On the global market, you can get the equipment for much less, the same inverter is a fraction of the cost that the UL listed American company version costs, the panels are a good bit less. But in the US, this stuff gets marked up pretty hard.

If your main load is for summer A/C, with a mild winter, the generation and usage line up much better.


Yeah things are very frugal here (my wife is especially frugal) so without AC it's pretty much just PC, two fridges, water heater, knickknacks like toaster, foodprocessor, etc. Stove and grill is gas, and kerosene heaters for when it drops below 10c. We could easily get by with a grid well below 10k usd I'm guessing

Electrical generation is largely separate from imported crude oil (what the article is about).

It takes a lot more than $5K to build a system that can replace a household's energy use. For 24 hour coverage you need substantial battery capacity, too.

To cover theoretical EV charging it gets even more expensive.

Prices continue to come down, but it still takes a lot to actually replace all of a household's energy usage with solar.


only a tiny portion of per-individual energy needs are currently electric. roughly guess, 10% or less.

diesel is widely used for things like shipping and other supply chain stuff, so expect knock-on price impacts.


Such a shame the US didn't switch at least some of the fleet to electric years ago when it had a chance. Total stupidity. Even to this day my local MAGA town balks at solar panels and just laughs at people who install them. Reality will smack them in the face sooner or later. Right now they are blaming the democratic governor because they only provided a tiny bill credit to citizens to help reduce rates but totally ignoring how the Republican promised nothing.

trains. semi-trucks. international cargo ships. airplanes.

semi-trucks might be viable electrically, none of the other options currently are.


My point was that switching the avenues that can be electrified to electric solutions improves supply to the remaining modes that require fuel.

we’re talking 1-2% of demand. it would help, but not a lot.

You mean electric trains are not viable in the US? In Europe most tracks are electric already.

generally no. the US has wide swathes of relatively undeveloped land, unlike Europe. Diesel electric is the norm for long haul.

it wouldn’t be impossible to electrify, but outside of a few specific intra-city corridors, no one has spent the capital to try.


It's $(a lot) because only a tiny fraction of the population can live without goods delivered and produced by diesel fuel.

You are assuming the supply of diesel goes to 0. Instead there is a reduction, not elimination and as a result, demand destruction will happen in the US just as its been happening for months outside the US. (This is partially what allowed us to avoid a crisis in March)

Trucks will stop delivering trash (ex. China dollar store crap, lower margin non food items and a billion other nonessential items). Food prices go up, people will do without less desserts or fancy foods but enough deliveries continue with the fuel saved that no one starves.

Now imagine if we replaced only 10% of diesel trucks with electric. Hell just focus on the short haul trucks. That unburned diesel could have helped buffer the remaining fleet.


I doubt it will ever be cost effective for the foreseeable future. The AI companies have astonishing amounts of compute and they’re effectively dumping it on the market.

More than that, running hundreds of conversation streams at once is essentially the same cost as running a single conversation. And then you add on the secondary benefit of having the GPUs running nearly all the time rather than mostly idle...

Local inference makes sense for speciality needs, or very small models. But if your model is bug enough to span GPUs its excessively wasteful to hoard those GPUs for yourself without piggybacking hundreds of other conversations on top of all that memory bandwidth and matrix multiplies.


The comparison is about how many tokens you buy vs how much hardware you could buy with the same money. It's as saying "if you have rib eyes at Applebee's every day, how long until cooking your own rib eyes pays for itself".

If you don't consume many of tokens, it will likely never pay for itself. If you do, though, it will have trade-offs, but you'll probably save money in the end.


"If they are selling it for less than it cost to make, buy as much as you can."

-- Warren Buffett


Only caveat is you’re buying time. Not a physical good. It’s only worth what you’re able to get out of it in that time.

For their current models, served directly from their infrastructure, they are profitable after training (which all present models are.)

I don't know when we'll have an open equivalent to Fable, let alone whatever (insane) hardware you'd need to run it locally.


Is that a real quote? Golden if true

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

Search: