From what I get from it, it describes a complex technical + social system that has been exploited to the max leading to insane pricing, risks and a ban. They want to do that again it seems.
That this specific algorithm isn’t revealed is the joke: it’s a complete fraud, their secret uber elite algorithm will favor nobody except the owners obviously.
It’s super nerdy and it took some effort, at least for me, to understand the fun.
I might have completely missed the mark as everything about this subject, such as the Wikipedia article and so on are completely new to me.
> Pixels are now significantly harder to support than many other devices. ... It will be far easier for us to support upcoming Motorola devices than Pixels.
The Motorola transition can't come soon enough, IMHO
Scry, keyword action that allows a player to look at a specific number of cards from the top of their library and then arrange those cards in any order, placing any number of them on the bottom of the library and the rest on top.
> Until recently, ideas about what causes autism have been vague, and this sense of uncertainty has allowed misinformation to escalate. ... Autism is genetic. You’re born autistic and you’re autistic for life. Most autistic people are autistic because of genes they got from their parents. This is why autism often runs in families. Much less commonly, other factors can play a role, but usually in combination with genes from parents.
Psst, words like "most", "often", and "usually" aren't helping your "vague" problem.
Agent is an old school way to say "constantly running daemon to accomplish some specific purpose", as someone who wrote a lot of performance monitoring agents. AI is using the term appropriately, but I think assuming it's always AI-first is slightly tragic.
Agent is an older term, apparently from the 1950s [1]:
> Alan Kay, a longtime proponent of agent technology, provides a thumbnail sketch tracing the more recent roots of software agents: “The idea of an agent originated with John McCarthy in the mid-1950’s, and the term was coined by Oliver G. Selfridge a few years later, when they were both at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. They had in view a system that, when given a goal, could carry out the details of the appropriate computer operations and could ask for and receive advice, offered in human terms, when it was stuck. An agent would be a ‘soft robot’ living and doing its business within the computer’s world.” (Kay 1984).
Appreciate the references, I was the New Relic Ruby agent maintainer in 2010, as an additional reference. And we called it an agent, because it was hosted on the customer's infrastructure, but they didn't maintain or control it, we did. Regrettably no license to kill, and not much in the way of secrecy or gadgetry.
> no license to kill, and not much in the way of secrecy or gadgetry
Insofar as you know.. there could be plenty of killer secrecy and gadgetry that was surreptitiously injected by your build/deployment/distribution systems ;)
Edit: the customers, in some cases, did indeed run interpreters that were bad, but that's not my lookout! Buy me a fancy beverage and I'll tell you a story sometime
No, the oldschool is agent for those things for which it was agent.
An agent may or may not also be a daemon. It can be a cron job where the only daemon was cron not the agent, and the agent doesn't persist and isn't a daemon.
It can be purely ephemeral where the only daemon was ssh or http or any other other generic communication service that is merely how the agent was delivered.
Countless ordinary "things that run on a host and perform tasks for some other host" were always called agents. Some of those were also daemons, just as they were also programs.
Nagios, crowdstrike, chef, puppet, ansible, vmware/kvm/virtualbox, jenkins... etc all have a slave part that runs (usually in the form of a daemon) which is and always was called the agent.
How is this article HN newsworthy?
reply