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

Source for 1? Are we sure those aren't hallucinations?

In some senses it's good. That feature list just says "use a smartphone then". No thank you. It's everything that a camera should not be.

GPS is useful, but not wifi. I don't need my camera becoming another IOT always online telemetry device. They're one of the few electronic devices built to last. Imagine needing fingerprint unlock on a camera, and for what? Prevent others from viewing your photos? Changing your settings? Also copy from card to pc is the best possible workflow. Imagine cameras like smartphone with no expandable storage.

Stop giving these people ideas! I am now very afraid they will listen to this guy since he actually has a follower base.


why do you assume a functionality will obligatory be abused against the client?

pro camera manufacturers are not google or apple. Have we became that defeatist?


Unfortunately, your comment reminds me that car manufactures aren't Google or Apple either, and still it seems that modern, high-end cars have a tendency of collecting more than what's needed for the car to remain in good shape or be diagnosed. I guess we became so defeatist when more and more companies started realizing they could make extra profit by collecting data from their customers.

> Also copy from card to pc is the best possible workflow

So turn off the camera, open the memory card slot cover which is flimsy 1mm prong, eject the card, insert it in the reader (if you have SD reader) or fiddle the microSD first from the convertor and then insert, copy, (insert microSD to SD convertor), open up slot cover, insert the card.

Surely beats just connecting the camera to the WiFi (which it does have anyway) and downloading through SMB. Suuure.

S9900 from 15 years ago had a built-in GPS receiver (and absolutely unneeded and never updated POI system). P1100 needs a smartphone for GPS for whatever reason - and app doesn't work 5 times from 5. But the latter is on me, I knew what I would get when I bought Nikon.


That's a good way of putting it But this is also the set of incentives that produces spaghetti code because "we're gonna get acquired in two years"

it's also the set of incentives that produces not-technically-illegal pump and dump schemes when the startup is sold to the market via IPO

I don't think corporate ever gave a shit about code quality. Honestly if there weren't building codes skyscrapers would be made with the cheapest shit that didn't collapse immediately and your house would be made of cardboard. Similarly if users were OK with buggy crap or if they had no choice (e.g. windows) then you can get away with lots of crap.

You could only argue about it when an engineer was in charge and even so when they're high up enough the pressures and incentives are to just ship fast and break stuff. Not every company can afford to be a NASA making uncrashable code that runs for 100 years and goes to pluto and all.


Unfortunately most people just treat it as a job. And indeed, it is a job for most people. Not all farmers love gardening and all in their free time. It's just a livelihood. For me I like programming but honestly for my job I can't be assed to do it by hand anymore. It looks good enough, screw it, it's not like they pay me extra to produce handwritten code. When the whole org is pushing down this one path you know it's time to dgaf

Yes I hate it too, but it's common in computing too. Better terms are "on demand" and "batch" which you sometimes see used instead in other contexts.

Lol someone is down voting all negative comments including this one. Hilarious.

Turns out countries with constitutions forbidding excessive debt are quite smart. It's like phone addiction -- if the parents don't lead by example and strictly enforce "no phones at the dinner table" then slowly it's just gonna creep back in and everyone's just staring at their phones again.

Debt is easy to deal with for a sovereign. Just dilute the currency. That will obviously happen before a debt crisis is allowed to materialize. And so the rich will get richer.

The real problem is not the debt, but the social instability caused by the measures taken to address the debt.


This would also make countries that constituionally prevent that level of debt look smart. At least if we see the state as an institution that should serve its citizens. If taking on debt requires making your citizens worse off to the point that it causes social instability that didn't serve them very well

If you see the state as an institution to allow the rich and powerful to extract resources from the rest of the population, then it's all fine. Just take out some debt to give a contract to your nephew, then pay it back by devaluing the currency



In the short term it will always look stupid. Borrowing allows you to invest, which leads to growth, which allows you to borrow more.

But debt also accumulates, and usually faster than GDP growth. Until debt servicing starts eating your budget. Which is a slowly encroaching killer

I find it difficult to draw conclusions just yet. Yes, Germany is under-investing and that hurts. But with another 20 years of hindsight it might look like the lesser evil


The words are so overloaded. Republican is just generic right wing. I think the "conservative" the parent is talking about is the neoliberalism like what Milton Friedman would propose. He would have wanted half of the government gone, next to no market intervention (he even argued against seatbelts in one lecture). That would actually be the "conservative" someone you stereotypically imagine like Ron Swanson would adopt, who describes the perfect government as just a person in a tiny white room. The Republicans are a joke, just like the Democrats. They're both there for themselves, and have no actual agenda, manifesto, ideals, or values. They've got all the junk identity politics, religion, abortion, immigration crap mixed in such that you're either picking crap or crap. There's nothing "liberal" about the Democrats and nothing "conservative" about the Republicans. The Republicans were even the ones who freed the slaves! Make of that what you will.

Oh, you want "libertarianism" then. Not the original kind, the Ayn Rand kind

That always works out well. Until the bears come [1]

[1] https://newrepublic.com/article/159662/libertarian-walks-int...


He didn't say what he "wanted". We're so blinded by partisan stupidity we can't even be bothered to read, understand, and think anymore.

"This is the thing I think of when X"

"Oh, so what you're describing is Y, actually"

"HE NEVER SAID HE WANTED Y! STUPID PARTISANS!"

Okay buddy


This is super interesting given that I had just watched an episode of survivorman where Les Stroud was given the "sing sing" ceremony by the villagers in the mountains, and also was wondering how they learned English that far up in the mountains.

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

Search: