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

You can get a new panoramic film camera for $69 - the Sprocket Rocket [1]. It makes images with grungy lomography charm - edges are soft but center is surprisingly sharp for a plastic lens. I really like the look of the images it produces. It has a hot shoe and a bulb setting.

[1] https://shop.lomography.com/us/sprocket-rocket-35-mm-film-pa...


They used to sell one that was much closer, the Horizon Kompact, that is reasonably available used (https://shop.lomography.com/us/horizon-kompakt)

Or people could start exploring panoramic mode on their phone. I do all kinds of stuff with it:

- vertical panoramas, like tall trees or buildings

- point it down while walking and do a "panorama" with your feet in it

- a "panoramic" photo by pointing it sideways in a moving car/train

- walk along a long shelf in a store taking a long "panorama"

- panoramas of moving vehicles going past stationary you

and...

- actual panoramas of some nice place you visit


While cool, there is quite a bit of difference between this and what the widelux is. The widelux rotates the lens as the front cover moves, which creates a drastically different look.

Yes, excellent primer of atproto, nice one!

I thought I was broad-minded enough to read Crash - I wasn't. I did enjoy other Ballard books.

'The Atrocity Exhibition' is even weirder. I didn't get it at all. Enjoyed most of his other work though.

A lot of Ballard was pretty weird. I liked much of his work but "world-destroying" contemporaries like Wyndham were more approachable in general.

It's poorly written, perhaps aimed at people already in the loop - would benefit from an AI edit.


I asked an LLM to create a plan for a 'digital rebirth' in order to minimize privacy harms. It's a lot of work, but increasingly: a worthwhile endeavor.


Might as well have asked a bottomless pit to do the same and get a better result from all the reverberations inside your empty head.


> with the AI and against it

I assume that a significant proportion of writers have worked this out via trial and error: AI can be highly useful, but you still have to work very hard on the text, maybe even harder.


Congrats on moving this concept forward. Can you say: what are the the alternative approaches to this problem?


Thanks! This took a while (approximately 30 days) to get to this point.

The market basically relies on two main alternative approaches right now, both of which have their merits:

1. File-based Memory (Markdown/Artifacts): Instead of just relying on the context window, you prompt the agent to maintain its state in local files (e.g., a PLANNING.md or a TASKS.md artifact). It’s a step up, but text files lack relational integrity. You are still trusting the LLM to format the file correctly and not arbitrarily overwrite critical constraints.

2. The Orchestrator Agent (Dynamic Routing): Using a frontier model as a master router. It holds a list of sub-agents (routes) and is trusted to dynamically evaluate the context, route to the correct agent, and govern their behavior on the fly. The merit here is massive flexibility and emergent problem-solving.

I went in the opposite direction.

The trade-off with Castra is that it trades all that dynamic flexibility for a deterministic SQLite state machine. The demerit (though I consider it a feature) is that it is incredibly rigid and, honestly, boring. There is no 'on-the-fly' routing. It’s an unyielding assembly line. But for enterprise SDLC, I don't want emergent behavior; I want predictability.

The alternatives optimize for agent autonomy. Castra optimizes for agent constraint.


Sounds good, I'll keep an eye out.


Just dropped the Show HN here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47601608. Would love to hear your thoughts on the architecture!


There's nothing at that link. Not even a title.


Looks like it was downvoted to hell and marked as dead super fast. I leave the flag for "dead" on in my HN settings (leaves it super desaturated) and this seems unusual


The rational response to document overload is to mostly ignore it.

Workers and managers in organizations are being overwhelmed by large numbers of documents because it's so easy to bang something off that's 'about right' and convincing enough.

But there's still some value in writing documents. I agree with the original article - it's all about thinking. My take on it is this: it's possible to use LLMs to write decent documents so long as you treat the process as a partnership (man and machine), and conduct the process iteratively. Work on it, and yes, think.


Simple: tell them to ask their LLM about it ...

"Tell me about all the potential pitfalls of blindly trusting LLM output, and relate a couple or three true stories about when LLM misinformation has gone badly wrong for people."


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

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

Search: