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

If you use it I'm curious if you find it limited at all from lagging behind superpowers? For instance I opened up one skill at random and they haven't yet pulled in the latest commit from last week.

I doubt any hot off the press features are *that* important, but am curious if the customizations of the fork are a net positive considering this.


did you hand modify the superpowers skills or are you managing this some other way?

I've gone the other way recently, shifting from pure plan mode to superpowers. I was reminded of it due to the announcement of the latest version.

It is perhaps confirmation bias on my part but I've been finding it's doing a better job with similar problems than I was getting with base plan mode. I've been attributing this to its multiple layers of cross checks and self-reviews. Yes, I could do that by hand of course, but I find superpowers is automating what I was already trying to accomplish in this regard.


Yes, it does help in that way. Maybe I'm still struggling to let go and let AI take the wheel from beginning to end but I enjoy the exploratory part of the whole process (investigating possible solutions, trying theories, doing little spikes, etc, all with CC's assistance). When it's time to actually code, I just let it do its own thing mostly unsupervised. I do spend quite a lot of time on spec writing.

That’s part of what I’ve liked about it over plan mode. Again not a scientific measurement but I feel it’s better at interactive brainstorming and researching the big picture with me. And it’s built in multiple checkpoints also give me more space to pivot or course correct.

I do think that GenAI will lead to a rise in mutation testing, property testing, and fuzzing. But it's worth people keeping in mind that there are reasons why these aren't already ubiquitous. Among other issues, they can be computationally expensive, especially mutation testing.

Can't be more expensive than GenAI itself, can it?

Not just you. To me Beyond tastes barely better than the classic fake meat products. Whereas I find impossible actually tastes good.

Sort of, although there's importance nuance. One would be surprised how often microwaves get used in proper commercial kitchens, as in places making their own food & not reheating stuff from a central commissary. But it's not being used in the way one likely pictures when they hear this. An example is that microwaves are great for par cooking vegetables, especially potatoes.

It can be worse! I went back to school for some graduate work in the early 00s after having been in the industry for a handful of years. There was a required class that was one of those "here's what life is like in the real world instead of academia".

The instructor was a phd student who'd never been in industry.

He kept correcting me about industry practices, telling me that I had no idea what the real world was like.


The Rodney Dangerfield film, Back To School covers this:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bjuHQOgggxo


> 10x more productive on my side business

Pretty sure the answer is here :)


Quite. On the face of it: possible career faux pas.

I own (with two other folk) my own little company and hire other people. I actively encourage my troops to have a bash but I suspect that a firm like AMZ would have differing views about what used to be called moonlighting. Mind you we only turnover a bit over £1M and that is loose change down the back of a sofa for AMZ ...


For a long time now I've felt that there's only situation where it makes sense. That's movies where it is something about it would make it much more enjoyable on IMAX or similar with a professional sound system. So something in the visual spectacle category.

For any normal movie I'd rather just watch it from my couch. But for the once in a while, over the top, blockbuster I'll still go to a theater.


Avatar is a good example.

I enjoyed each one in the theater but I tried watching Avatar: The Way of Water at home and despite having an entire media room devoted to good sound, proper lighting well calibrated projector and such it was not all that great. The movie fell a little flat without the theater experience to go with it.

I saw the limited run in advance to the 3rd one coming out in theaters again and it was good in that setting, as a reference point for my experience


Exactly, Avatar was literally what I was picturing when I wrote that. They're not good movies. But damn they're fun to watch in 3D, on a giant screen, and with great sound.

That's not to say that all movies in this category are *only* worth watching in the theater like Avatar is. For instance I would have still enjoyed the recent Dune movies either way but they were a lot better with all the pomp & circumstance.


At that point what you are describing is a theme park ride. It only works a handful of times though before people get bored of it and want something else.

Pretty much. I only go to a theater about once every 2 years or so at most.

Tent-pole black movies? Basically anything Ryan Coogler or Jordan Peele are involved in. They're a case where the unfortunate stereotype might work out in your favor, if you're looking for a group experience that heightens with shared energy and a visual-and-sonic spectacle. (Well, assuming it's true.)

Or maybe it's just a horror/Marvel thing. Weapons and Endgame had a similar audience feel to Sinners and Black Panther.

Definitely not during Chris Nolan films. It's hard enough to hear his dialogue when it's dead silent.


My favorite is when people say they like "asian cuisine" or "asian food". China alone has several distinct cuisines. Why do we act like this is a monolithic concept?

Because there was a lot of cultural cross-contamination between these countries, there is a huge overlap in ingredients due to climate similarities and trade between neighboring countries.

I group European & American food into their respective groups as well.

> Asia rolls out 4-day weeks, WFH to solve fuel cris...

Makes no sense, same with "I'm in a mood for asian food"


> Makes no sense, same with "I'm in a mood for asian food"

Thai, Japanese, Vietnamese, Indian food / cuisine even thought different is more probably closer to each other same like e.g. Polish and Spanish is closer to each other than to most other asian cuisine.


Asian countries developed with more overlap in basic ingredients, cooking techniques, and historical influence networks than Europe did. Historically there were 3 influence zones in Asia. There is a lot of pickling, fermenting, salting, drying. In Asia of these techniques were more or less unified. Fish sauces from different countries are Pepsi vs Coca-Cola level of difference.

> Polish and Spanish is closer to each other than to most other asian cuisine.

I'd say Polish has a lot of similarities with Asian cuisine. Sure, both have stews and sausages, but flavor profiles are very different: acidic vs sour.

I won't be able to tell difference between gyoza & wonton if they shaped the same, but surely I can tell difference between ravioli & uszka. Uszka is IMO closer to any dumpling from Asia than to anything European.


I disagree with that. There is nothing in South Asian cuisine similar to sashimi or to soy heavy stir fries.

Very few east Asian dishes use the spices most popular in South Asia.

Spaghetti is far more similar to noodles than it is to any South Asia equivalent I can think of.

Yes, a filled pasta is a very different thing from dumpling, but a lot of European cuisines have dumplings.


> but a lot of European cuisines have dumplings.

Those were brought to them most likely by China in one way or another.

> Yes, a filled pasta is a very different thing from dumpling,

You saying it like a filled pasta and a dumpling isn't the same twist on "filling encased in thin dough".

> There is nothing in South Asian cuisine similar to sashimi or to soy heavy stir fries.

Dish is ingredients and method. Stir-frying is a Chinese technique (technically multiples, but all originated in China). Ingredients get replaces all the time for various reasons. You're telling me Poriyal is not close relative to the OG stir-fry?


Japanese food and Indian food are as different from each other as Indian food and Italian food.

I'm not sure how you arrive at that opinion. Take the example of Punjabi food. It's heavily based around ghee and dairy. Does anything in Thai cuisine use butter except European style pastries?

The only major similarities I see uniting the national cuisines you listed (not regional ones) are things like curries and rice. The former arrived in Japan with European influence (where it's also common in colonial countries) and the latter isn't a feature common to all Asian cuisines (e.g. Mongolian).


Ah I think I get it.

Asian food = contains rice

European food = contains wheat

American food = contains liquefied synthetic cheese?


American food contains maize, obviously. This works for multiple understandings of the word "American" :)

American food = contains corn (maize), in all its glorious (ex. nixtamalized, unprocessed, flour, etc.) and unholy (ex. high fructose corn syrup) forms.

Pretty much, but not exactly. There is also a cooking technique (so American will be deep-fried).

Most national dishes are nothing more than adaptation of dishes from another country. Sometimes tweaks to ingredients, sometimes tweaks to techniques.


A popular carnival dish in the American South, is deep-fried Twinkies.

A popular incendiary device in the US, is a turkey fryer; traditionally ignited in November.


> I group European & American food into their respective groups as well.

If by "American" you mean "Unitedstatesian" then I agree. But Latinamerican food is worlds apart from what the US and Canada eat.


Oddly enough, many Canadians use the word "American" to refer to Unitedstatesians, so presumably they'd use it to describe cuisine that same way (as in, poutine is Canadian but disco fries are American). This is extremely analogous to the Asia conversation, in that of course people know the term comes from the continental scale, but using that scale is less common, so it must be specifically invoked.

And then you've got Puerto Ricans, who are definitely US'ian but eat more like the non-US'ian Americans, so who knows what they would think of if you ask about American food, but it wouldn't surprise me if Contiguousunitedstatesian is the default (i.e., the same cuisine the Canadians would be referring to).


"American" is as broad as Asian and even more annoying. I ate some great food in Surinamese restaurants, but I'm guessing that's not what you meant by using that word.

The same goes for "European", Nordic cousine is very different than the Balkan cousine, which is very different than the Iberian cousine and so on.


What would you consider the major differences between European and American?

I feel like as Europeans, we're as good at importing American food as America is about importing European.


> I feel like as Europeans, we're as good at importing American food as America is about importing European.

What you call European food is a direct result of importing American food. Just different Americans...


American food is things like beef jerky, pemmican, maize breads.

European food is things like hamburgers, French fries, hotdogs, and apple pie.

This is getting silly

Edit: added a missing comma


As European as American apple pie or as American as European apple pie?

Globally, everyone does this.

When someone outside of America thinks of American food, do you think they will think of Cajun gumbo, TexMex, Clam Chowder, or something you'd find on the menu at McDonalds?


>When someone outside of America thinks of American food, do you think they will think of Cajun gumbo, TexMex, Clam Chowder, or something you'd find on the menu at McDonalds?

Statistically this random non-american is some sort of Asian. Therefore the answer is finger lickin good.


Ah, a fan of Korean fried chicken, I see.

All of the above. I like the first three.

I thought that McDonald's was considered Scottish cuisine?

In vulgar American English, "Asia" mostly just refers to the wider Confuciosphere + some parts of Central Asia (though rarely thought about.) Most Americans will look at you funny if you call Pakistan or Jordan Asian, because that's not how we use the word.

> China alone has several distinct cuisines. Why do we act like this is a monolithic concept?

When someone is talking about "Chinese food", they almost certainly are talking about the cuisine established by Chinese immigrants in their country, not food as it exists within China. This isn't unique to China.

More American vulgarism fun facts, "Chinese" wasn't pan-Chinese until somewhat recently. It pretty much exclusively meant Cantonese outside of very specific contexts, like geopolitics. This changed slowly starting in the 1970s, but emphasis on slowly and it still persists in interesting ways today.


Asian can also have different meanings in different places. If you say someone is Asian in Britain it means South Asian, whereas in the US it seems to mean East Asian.

It's similar to how people say "Europe does this or that". Basically the part of their thoughts dedicated to that part of the world is so small that all they can afford is a tiny box, and everything has to go in there, reality be damned.

Europe at the very least has one parliament that sometimes passes laws that apply to almost the whole continent

Europe does not have a parliament. The EU does, but it is not even sovereign over the EU countries.

Not really, it's not sovereign. The EU can pass laws that each European country chooses to implement. If they don't implement enough EU laws, they can get kicked out, which means more pieces of paper are written and some European countries might choose to afford them less privileges.

No. EU laws are of two kinds: directives and regulations. Directives work roughly as you describe, while regulations have direct effect like regular laws.

> The EU can pass laws that each European country...

Each EU member state, the UK, Switzerland and Russia don't really get involved


Those countries may also ratify EU laws if they wish. I think the UK has something similar to GDPR and Switzerland also picks and chooses which laws it thinks make sense.

No, they don't. The UK was a member of the EU when GDPR was passed, and chose to adopt it as law. When it left the EU it didn't repeal it.

They may both decide to copy, or imitate laws similar to the ones the the EU has, but they can't 'ratify' them.


A lot of the places by me have both a Chinese menu and a Japanese menu. Some even have a Thai menu.

So when you're going out for Asian food, it really is that. No sense in being pedantic here.


And I doubt the contents of any of those menus are particularly close to what you'd find in the countries they claim to be from. It's really more like "Asian-inspired."

I often wondered about that.

We hosted an exchange student for a few weeks, and he was from Nanjing. Before he left the country, we took him to a Chinese restaurant and warned him that it was likely going to be more like American-Chinese.

He went through the menu and pointed out the dishes which were authentic and those which were not. I was surprised at how many were actually authentic -- it was about half of the menu. Maybe we were at a more authentic Chinese restaurant, as the menu was in both English and Chinese.

He was a great kid, and I really enjoyed the experience. He loved peanut butter and jelly, had to spit out ranch dressing, and did not care at all for pumpkin pie.


There's also the question of authentic/traditional to which part of china, in particular in cases where dishes with the same name aren't made the same. But beyond that, just because there's a dish on the menu one recognizes from their homeland doesn't mean it's prepared the same.

Yes, and we tested this as well by letting him order some of them. He said that they were like the food he would get at home.

One other amusing bit, I had to stop him before he shoved an entire fortune cookie in his mouth and ate the paper. Those are 100% American.


Authentic places certainly exist. That's not generally the sort of place that has menus covering multiple countries, though.

There are also places where they can make stuff like home, but usually won't. They might have made "proper" stuff owing to the presence of your exchange student.


I went to a combo thai-chinese place once... Now I want sesame chicken...

When Asians use the term, we usually use it to loosely mean "my home cuisine and other cuisines that share similar characteristics"

When my wife or I say "I feel like eating something Asian today" it usually means spicy-Chinese adjacent, i.e. served hot, vegetables fully cooked, heavy on flavor, paired with either rice or freshly made noodles.

Korean qualifies, Sichuan food qualifies, Thai food qualifies, Indian food maybe sort of borderline qualifies on some days but only if we haven't eaten it recently.

We don't usually mean Japanese food when we say that. That's just our mutual understanding of what we call "Asian food". Yeah, I guess we unapologetically kicked Japan out of culinary Asia :) It doesn't matter. The system works for us. We don't dislike Japanese food, but we'll say "Japanese food" when we feel like having Japanese food.

Another Asian family from a different part of Asia probably uses the term to refer to a different subset of Asian cuisines.

Like just about everything else in Asia, it's a fluid term that means different things to different people. I've only ever seen people in the west be pendantic about terms like this. I also think of it as a very western ideology to want to have a term have a singular global definition.


We rarely say "Asian food" - we would be more specific.

Because some places didn’t get immigration or even access to imported products. Being small town in Lithuania I didn’t even tried pizza until late 90s, chinese 2000s and indian probaly 2010s. There’s still like less than 5 Indian restaurants in country and probably none korean, etc.

Also things like asian fusion can evolve independently.


Because that is how it's presented to "us". If the cuisine that we could access where we live was more diverse, we would think differently about the entire set (which is not happening for another set of entirely good reasons, but alas.)

I don't know about that. Japanese food and Thai food have very little in common besides rice. Possibly there is some overlap in curry but not much.

Sure. And most people I knew are able to differentiate between "sushi" and "Thai curry".

Isn't there a concept of regional cuisine like "Mediterranean cuisine"?

I was watching some travel show on PBS, which I can't recall the name of. They were going through Egypt and met up with a guy from the area who walked them through getting the local food.

So much of what they had looked the same as the food that you could find in Greece, but they were fiercely adamant that it was both different and better.

Anyway, it's Mediterranean food in my mind. :-)


Mediterranean cuisine = contains olive

>" Why do we act like this is a monolithic concept?"

Under "we" you mean white / the westerners? Because the majority of us do not give a flying fuck about other parts of the world. Not important enough. One can easily see how our media reacts to tragedies on one one side comparatively to the other.

As for food. I live in Toronto and can clearly distinguish between quite a few different "Asian" cuisines.


Because much of the Asian food the average American will come across isn’t necessarily identifiable to a specific region or country in Asia, or is a blend of various Asian cuisines.

Or they are broadly referring to the various cuisines of Asia as a singular group, because unless you’re very familiar with those cuisines, they may see broadly similar.


The term "Western" is often used in an equally broad sense, referring to Europe/North American culture.

That's always been a weird one for me. If I might quote Gemini's summary since it seems accurate enough:

> Geographical/Historical: The Bosporus Strait in Turkey is historically considered the dividing line between Europe (West) and Asia (East).

> Prime Meridian: The 0° longitude line running through Greenwich, England, is used to technically separate the Eastern and Western Hemispheres.

> Cultural/Political: Cultural definitions are often more relevant, placing countries like Australia, New Zealand, and North America in the "West" due to historical ties, despite their geographic location.

I suppose you're leaning into the "Bosporus Strait" option more than the "Prime Meridian" option, given that the former would put most of Europe in the West while the latter would put most of it in the East.


I feel shame because I once thought a restaurant's sign said "Asian Place" when it actually said "A Siam Place"

It's a category that makes sense to people and communicates something clearly..?

Wait until you hear someone talk about "begging the question"

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

Search: