7/24/2026 at 5:39:22 AM
Article is just a (wordy) recapitulation of this tweet from a former Walkman engineer: https://x.com/akiraa_tanaka/status/2080114490830680500But fair play to OP, you'd have to bounce it through at least Google Translate to make it legible to the predominant English-speaking HM crowd: https://x-com.translate.goog/akiraa_tanaka/status/2080114490...
Still would have been good for the Substack author to link to the tweet rather than just embedding a nearly-too-small-to-be-readable png of a JPEG and six links to the tweet author's X profile.
by plorg
7/24/2026 at 8:22:59 PM
I don’t see why anyone should be obligated to direct traffic to Twitter. Let the author post on his own blog or digital garden. I don’t want to go on Twitter. Echoing the same as others, it’s good to bring any content from Twitter into the open web.by SirHackalot
7/25/2026 at 3:25:53 PM
To be fair, the site guidelines encourage submitting the original source, not rehashing it on a blog and posting that.> Please submit the original source. If a post reports on something found on another site, submit the latter.
by al_borland
7/24/2026 at 1:19:39 PM
IOW, it was also technically hard for Sony to launch the original Walkman, but they overcame the difficulties, because they expected a huge market success (which followed).Now the product would be niche, and what had been originally built for its production became unavailable. The effort to stand up it all over again would not pay off.
by nine_k
7/24/2026 at 2:30:18 PM
The first Walkman from the late 70s was just an existing Sony portable cassette recorder (the TCM-100B), but with the mono head replaced with a stereo head and the recording functionality removed. Once that first unit proved there was a market, they were able to continually re-invest the money into miniaturization and new features so by the mid-90s Walkmans (Walkmen?) were high-quality cassette players that were barely larger than the size of a tape. All the tape enthusiasts would want a recreation of a high-end 90s Walkman, but the tooling and supply chain required to build one no longer exists and can't be recreated without the revenue stemming from portable cassette players being the predominant way to listen to music on the go for 15+ years.by ndiddy
7/24/2026 at 8:13:21 PM
It was also nearly magical how long my final Walkman could run with a single AA cell.by saltcured
7/25/2026 at 5:38:03 AM
The jump from TPS-L2/WM-1 to WM-2 was ENORMOUS. Like, WM-2 was TINY - 75% the size of TPS-L2/WM-1. They were almost done before they got started! I know I got one Xmas 1981 and it was stolen in 1984 but now I have 3x.by williamDafoe
7/24/2026 at 8:04:06 PM
I don't have a twitter account and do not want to go there. Anything good brought over to another format is value added.by smcg
7/24/2026 at 7:29:36 AM
Yes, that is the primary reasonpeople just want it but not enough people to buy the thing
same happen with physical games
by tonyhart7
7/27/2026 at 12:15:21 PM
people buy physical games when its an option. take god of war ragnarok where more than 60% of copies sold were on disk. its a totally different situation from niche products with no existing supply chain.sony numbers are distorted because most third party games are digital only, and the average players preference for physical is not so strong that they wouldnt buy the game at all. its also not counting sharing or second hand sales so the number of players on physical is even higher.
by tancop
7/27/2026 at 2:46:00 PM
I have five PS5 discs from around launch. Gifts. It is such a pain finding them and putting them in only to download a patch anyway. I’d sell them but I don’t want to perpetuate them as a thing so I’ll likely just throw them away.by ectospheno
7/24/2026 at 8:18:07 AM
> same happen with physical gamesAnd now it’s faster to get them online than to go to the store, even if the game doesn’t have to download itself again for updates.
by rbanffy
7/24/2026 at 8:33:51 AM
... and you end up being the donkey they can pin the tail onto, when they feel like bilking you again.by rustcleaner
7/24/2026 at 8:47:51 PM
Companies like this are why strong customer protection laws need to exist, and be full of teeth.by rbanffy
7/24/2026 at 8:04:53 PM
the stores also have terrible physical stock. getting a game you want by blindly walking into a store is a gamble now.by smcg
7/24/2026 at 8:49:16 PM
Record stores are the same - subscription services for music made them very niche.by rbanffy
7/24/2026 at 8:27:21 PM
Does that mean capitalism is not an efficient system to meet the needs of well-informed consumers? Why am I being lumped in with an 8 year old who asks their parents to buy them an online game? There should be a market for physical media and devices with physical buttons if people exist who want them. These companies won’t work on anything that doesn’t bring them a gazillion dollars, so billion/million dollar ventures never get off the ground.by SirHackalot
7/25/2026 at 5:17:43 AM
From the article:> even sales in the tens of thousands might not recover the development and tooling costs
If you're looking for an argument against capitalism, this wasn't it.
by 2000UltraDeluxe
7/25/2026 at 4:39:57 PM
[dead]by SirHackalot
7/25/2026 at 3:47:06 AM
capitalism is the most efficient system everthe statistic literally says it all, any person that think otherwise its delusional
by tonyhart7
7/25/2026 at 10:22:09 AM
Is it, though?Rule of thumb: when a fanboy asserts that any person holding an alternative view is defective, you should immediately abandon the fanboy's position and adopt the alternative view. It's heuristically more likely to be correct, and it gets you out of an odious fan club.
Case in point: China proceeded through stages of development more efficiently than any western nation. Case in point: South Korea incubated its industry in a command economy.
by psd1
7/25/2026 at 4:49:37 PM
Throw the USSR in there as well. Central planning allowed them to leap from an agrarian society to launching Sputnik and putting the first human in space, which spooked us into kickstarting the space race. It wasn’t market incentives that did that.by SirHackalot
7/26/2026 at 9:52:52 AM
The USSR performed _somewhat_ well, but i wouldn't say it clearly outperformed the west given the whole "collapse" thing. I could argue the point, but only weakly.It's more illuminating to pick the two exemplars, America and China, because they have many parallels
by psd1
7/26/2026 at 5:47:29 PM
It outperformed the west in some things, notably not computing (which sealed its fate). I agree though. But I think there’s also something to be said about the way in which the experiment ended. Compared to the bloody, violent disintegration of most historical superpowers, the dissolution of the USSR was a remarkably swift, self-inflicted, and low-violence event.by SirHackalot
7/27/2026 at 11:23:40 AM
It's hard to layer meaning over social media comment, but what i wanted to express was the nonsensicality of reducing history to "yay capitalism".There's a common strand of thought that goes "America is emphatically capitalist, America is successful, ergo success is due to capitalism". But America finished WWII with a proportionally-small loss of life and a massive and intact industrial base while all the existing powers were in a heap of wreckage. It then held the mortgage on reconstruction and dictated the terms of the peace.
With advantages like that, it would be remarkable if they didn't end up on top of the pile. Capitalism was merely the vehicle, and other vehicles would have been equally adequate.
People who need answers to be simple will continue to make bold claims about the relative merits of capitalism. It's just identity signaling. I'd like to cull humans who, in adulthood, decline to develop critical thinking skills. These people vote, and they shouldn't.
by psd1
7/25/2026 at 11:56:13 AM
case in point: bringing 2 best example of why capitalism is the best systemby tonyhart7
7/26/2026 at 9:55:20 AM
Care to explain?by psd1
7/25/2026 at 4:38:11 PM
Take a breath, you’re having a total knee-jerk reaction. What statistic?So out of thousands of years of human history, we somehow stumbled onto the absolute final, perfect economic system 250 years ago with zero room for upgrade? Makes total sense /s. I’m sure there were those who said feudalism/mercantilism were the most efficient systems ever and we don’t need capitalism. Even Marx was a fan of capitalism, he viewed it as a revolutionary stepping stone towards a more efficient system and praised it for lifting feudal subjects out of poverty, and the massive productivity gains it produced. That’s not what’s being argued here.
> "The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years, has created more massive and more colossal productive forces than have all preceding generations together."
by SirHackalot
7/25/2026 at 5:06:57 PM
are you want to move goal post further and further ????by tonyhart7
7/24/2026 at 8:17:48 AM
But fair play to OP, you'd have to bounce it through at least Google Translate to make it legible to the predominant English-speaking HM crowd: https://x-com.translate.goog/akiraa_tanaka/status/2080114490...
People still use google translate? Most browsers now have translate built in, as do llmI imagine grok on x will do this too
by fsuts
7/24/2026 at 8:24:09 AM
X’s auto translate of tweets has been really awesome actually.I wonder why its so much better than localised titles and subtitles on youtube.
by dijit
7/24/2026 at 10:53:22 AM
LLMs can mentally match and replace whole sentences with culturally similar concepts rather than having to go word-by-word. That tend to yield more natural sounding, not necessarily accurate, translations than literal ones. That's great if you don't need accurate details and/or consistent inverse translations.Classical machine translations can't take "EUTs sets up a bearer with eNB" and produce "The device (like a phone) connects to the cell tower."[1], it's a fragment of confection to an LLM, and that's useful when/where it is.
1: I just literally asked Gemini Flash to do it
by numpad0
7/24/2026 at 8:31:01 AM
Firefox didn't offer to translate this, so initially I wasn't aware that it could. But I could get it to translate via the menu. And Google Translate is still a bit better, so I do regularly fall back to that.by gpvos
7/24/2026 at 8:39:49 AM
Unless something changed recently (and things change all the time where LLMs are involved), deepl.com does the best translations. I have a sister who translates professionally; she said it's the only one where she can use the result and make some improvements instead of throwing it away and starting over.by ahartmetz
7/24/2026 at 4:14:53 PM
Deepl's professional advantage is not in the translation itself (even though it has always been a notch above the rest), but in the UI. You can literally click any word on the translated text and (a) see a list of alternatives, and (b) pick one and then the following text adapts to your choice.In technical terms it lets you stop the transformer at any token, sample alternatives from the probability distribution at that point, pick your desired next token and resume the generation.
This UI lets an expert guide and control the output of the tool, instead of having to fight it. I wish there was a frontend for large GPTs that worked like this instead of the ubiquitous-yet-useless chatbot.
by Giefo6ah
7/25/2026 at 1:50:42 AM
I'm not sure if that is what she meant. In any case, it does sound very useful for code. The input becomes messy to represent as text, but prompts don't usually make it into version control, so not much is lost.by ahartmetz
7/25/2026 at 8:57:54 PM
I'd bet this is what she meant because I've done professional translation in the past.The input and output of a GPT it not a sequence of messages in turns: fundamentally the input is the entire context (both from the user and the model), and the output is a probability distribution for 1 single next token.
The chat is only one of many interaction patterns possible with that primitive: one where the "most likely" output token is concatenated to the previous input and this is repeated until a limit is reached or the model produces a special "end of sequence" token.
Representing a more complete interaction pattern as a chat is impossible because the chat abstraction is lossy and could never represent it. Sometimes the abstraction leaks, as with the concept of "temperature", that's not a parameter of the model but of the chat.
by Giefo6ah