What is Hackers' Pub?

Hackers' Pub is a place for software engineers to share their knowledge and experience with each other. It's also an ActivityPub-enabled social network, so you can follow your favorite hackers in the fediverse and get their latest posts in your feed.

Einer meiner (Lieblings) Deutsch Bahn Hacks: anstatt Regio Tickets einfach Fernverkehrs Tickets buchen mit gewollten dem Regio Teil.

Beispiel: Ich bin am Montagabend beim @webmontagkiel und muss dann weiter nach Hamburg.
Regio Preis ohne Bahncard: Kiel -> Hamburg 28,90€ (für 90min Bahnfahren?!).

Auf der Strecke fährt ja nun mal auch sehr selten was anderes, außer einem Regionalverkehr, und somit ist es selten, dass man einen Fernverkehr Sparpreis buchen kann.

Wenn ich aber nach folgender Strecke suche und buche: Kiel -> Hamburg HbF -> Hamburg Harburg und dann noch einstelle, dass ich von Hamburg HbF -> Harburg mit dem Fernverkehr fahren möchte, bekomme ich einen Sparpreis für 19,99€ ohne Bahncard. (Dabei fährt diese Verbindung dann sogar über Lüneburg)
Je nach Sparpreis Verfügbarkeiten und Bauarbeiten im Hamburger Fernverkehr kann das auch günstiger sein. Es muss aber immer vorab gebucht werden.
Die Regiofahrten sind i.d.R. auch ohne Zugbindung, heißt, man kann auch später oder früher fahren.

Schöner Hack. Noch schöner wäre es, wenn die @landesregierungLand Schleswig-Holstein :vfd: SH zu einem richtigen Bahnland mit vernünftigen Tarifen und guten Verbindungen machen würde...

0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0

文獻史料說連接香港羅湖和深圳的舊鐵橋,今天得見真跡。不遠處是深圳河,河的另一邊就是中國了

隨口說在書和博物館看了很多次羅湖橋的照片,然後被同事說會看這些很奇怪,了解自己地方的歷史很怪嗎 :blobcatphoto_frustration:

0
0
0

The « Software Source Code Exhbition », co-curated by Mathilde Fichen from @swheritageSoftware Heritage, is now on display at Cité des Sciences et de l'Industrie, the most prominent science museum in , France.

cite-sciences.fr/fr/au-program

It's until March 25th, 2026 and in the free part of the museum, no ticket needed.

If you are around and into software, I recommend visiting it, as it's super super fascinating.

0
1

LLMのコストが効用との比較として許容できるという話だったら理解できるけど、そこで人間との比較を持ち出してしまったのがやはりまだ違うのではないかという気がする……けど、この方向性のまま話を進めていくと、社会を維持するための労働力として人間を増やすことが要請されているといった出生主義的な都合に直面しそうなので、これ以上はあまり掘り下げたくないな(?)

0

まず氏は個々のタスクで人々の生活に必要な資源を枯渇させるほど消費していないと主張していて、総量が莫大なのはタスクの数のせいだとしている。
そうなると、生命の維持とは別の、タスクを処理する労働力としてという文脈で捉えるのはある程度自然に思われて、コスト比較は成立すると思うんだよなあ

0
0
12
0
0
2
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
0

Co vlastně znamená zemřít? Celou věčnost se mi tyto blouznivé myšlenky honily v mém temném pokoji hlavou. Představoval jsem si, jak právě v tuto chvíli jistě někde někdo umírá. To není žádné podobenství, vtip ani domněnka, ale pravda. Stoprocentní skutečnost. Teď žijeme, ale bez ohledu na to dříve nebo později všichni zemřeme, takže by se vlastně dalo říct, že být naživu znamená čekat na smrt, ne? Proč tedy vůbec za těchto okolností lidé žijí? A kdo jsem vlastně já, který stále žije? Úplně jsem se v tom utápěl, ničemu jsem už nerozumněl, mnohokrát jsem usnul, těžce oddechoval a zase se budil. Pak jsem na to přišel. Napadlo mě, že umírání je stejné jako spánek. Je v tom jediný rozdíl, to, že člověk spal, se pozná, až druhý den ráno, když se probudí. A pokud ráno nepřijde, člověk zůstane spát navždy. Není právě tohle smrt? Pokud ano, pak by to znamenalo, že si zemřelý není vědom toho, že umřel. Svou smrt nikdy neuvidí. Takže ve skutečnosti nikdo neumírá? Nad tímhle zjištěním jsem kroutil hlavou.

Mieko Kawakami – Nebe
Přeložila Klára Macúchová

0
0
0
1
0
10
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0

all of those companies are framing mass firings as “AI productivity gains”, when in reality they’re correcting their hyperscale hiring decisions.

all while “AI” fails to realise any improvements, but hey it’s a much better story.

♥️ to those affected.

theguardian.com/technology/202

0
5
0
0
1
1

I'm writing this in English.

Not because English is my first language—it isn't. I'm writing this in English because if I wrote it in Korean, the people I'm addressing would run it through an outdated translator, misread it, and respond to something I never said. The responsibility for that mistranslation would fall on me. It always does.

This is the thing Eugen Rochko's post misses, despite its good intentions.

@GargronEugen Rochko argues that LLMs are no substitute for human translators, and that people who think otherwise don't actually rely on translation. He's right about some of this. A machine-translated novel is not the same as one rendered by a skilled human translator. But the argument rests on a premise that only makes sense from a certain position: that translation is primarily about quality, about the aesthetic experience of reading literature in another language.

For many of us, translation is first about access.

The professional translation market doesn't scale to cover everything. It never has. What gets translated—and into which languages—follows the logic of cultural hegemony. Works from dominant Western languages flow outward, translated into everything. Works from East Asian languages trickle in, selectively, slowly, on someone else's schedule. The asymmetry isn't incidental; it's structural.

@GargronEugen Rochko notes, fairly, that machine translation existed decades before LLMs. But this is only half the story, and which half matters depends entirely on which languages you're talking about. European language pairs were reasonably serviceable with older tools. Korean–English, Japanese–English, Chinese–English? Genuinely usable translation for these pairs arrived with the LLM era. Treating “machine translation” as a monolithic technology with a uniform history erases the experience of everyone whose language sits far from the Indo-European center.

There's also something uncomfortable in the framing of the button-press thought experiment: “I would erase LLMs even if it took machine translation with it.” For someone whose language has always been peripheral, that button looks very different. It's not an abstract philosophical position; it's a statement about whose access to information is expendable.

I want to be clear: none of this is an argument that LLMs are good, or that the harms @GargronEugen Rochko describes aren't real. They are. But a critique of AI doesn't become more universal by ignoring whose languages have always been on the margins. If anything, a serious critique of AI's political economy should be more attentive to those asymmetries, not less.

The fact that I'm writing this in English, carefully, so it won't be misread—that's not incidental to my argument. That is my argument.

5
13
0
0
0
0
5
0