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

I'm working on shipping the second batch of the Brighter Lamp, a lamp that's equal to ~30 normal lamps for daylight levels of light indoors.

We delivered our first 500 units last month and got positive reviews, but lots of small issues to straighten out.

[0] https://getbrighter.com/


This looks nice, my wallet doesn't like the price. I understand it though, that's some tech!

975 CHF for a lamp.. wow. Any independent reviews that I should trust?


What's the reason it is so shockingly expensive?

That's what good lights go for, they're niche and people pay good money for them. I really liked my office lamps and I wanted to get the same for home, after a quick search I discovered they were 1300+ euros

1000+ is the "designer" lighting territory. Margins are enormous margins, but to charge those you need to be an established designer and have a reputation.

wow, looks awesome!

Would love to pick one up if there's ever a sale!


> This Reuters article claims OpenAI is going to generate $3.6 billion in revenue this year, but the costs will lead to a loss of more than $5 billion. It expects a major revenue jump next year to $11.6 billion

The article linked[0] is from last year.

A recent article[1] from this year says "OpenAI looks to meet its full-year revenue target of $13 billion and a cash-burn target of $8.5 billion, the report added."

[0]https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/o...

[1] https://www.reuters.com/technology/openais-first-half-revenu...


Aren’t they still deep in the red? What’s the justification for claiming they’ll become profitable?


Yeah, this is a pretty major error. They already have a higher revenue than the article's quoted "jump next year" (which was this year and was an underestimate).


Don't worry, people in the thread are now going to pivot to "Uhh, those numbers don't matter! Here's an opinion from some tech blog about the financials of a private company!"


Is "parallel test time compute" available in claude code or the api? Or is it something they built internally for benchmark scores?


I'm wondering if it's not just: spawn multiple time the same prompt and take the best


It is exactly that


Interesting there doesn't seem to be benchmarking on codeforces


I'm a codeforces guy, and I've benchmarked o3 on several of my favorite problems of various difficulty and concluded that o3 really isn't suitable for true reasoning still. Mostly because it's unable to think from first principles, so if you throw a non-standard problem it will brick. I think this will be a fundamental issue with any LLM.

I will say I would far more appreciate an AI that when it faces these ambiguous problems, either provides sources for further reading, or just admits it doesn't know and is, you know, actually trying to work together to find a solution instead of being trained to 1 shot everything.

When generalizing these skills to say, debugging, I will often just straight up ignore the AI slop output it concluded and instead explore the sources it found. o3 is surprisingly good at this. But for hard niche debugging, the conclusions it comes to are not only wrong, but it phrases it in an arrogant way and when you push back it's actually like talking to a narcissist (phrasing objections as "you feel", being excessively stubborn, word dumping a bunch of phrases that sound correct but don't hold up to scrutiny, etc).



My experience with auth solutions/libraries is you invariably want to customize some flow/data/functions, but it's impossible because the library isn't flexible enough.

A better solution might be premade auth primitives (oauth providers, db adapters) that you copy paste into your codebase shadcn-style, and modify when necessary.

I feel like "don't roll your own auth" is less true than it was 5-10 years ago as now there is an abundance of good references and core libraries.


I wish IDEs had more features/tooling around types. For example, something like "expand all types by one level" where

{ foo: Bar } would expand to { foo : { bar1: string, bar2: Baz } } (and you could trigger it again to expand Baz)

(this would be especially nice if it worked with vscode/cursor on-hover type definitions)


The poor support for types in VS Code has always been a blocker for me adopting it vs. Jetbrains, where types and the intellisense are much easier to jump between.


This guy gets it


This would produce interesting results with types defined via `infer` or template literal types.

That being said I wish the same.


Really cool! I'm working on a lamp that gives you daylight levels of light indoors (albeit no raleigh scattering and columnated light). On the bright side (pun intended), it's 50,000 lumens instead of ~4500. https://getbrighter.com/


Nice to see more high quality indoor light options. Any idea how you guys compare to this one? https://getchroma.co/products/skylight. I've got some of their other products - I'm generally been pretty happy with them but they do tend to be fairly pricey.


He hasn't given a spectrometer graph? When you ask him for one he can't seem to be bothered by something so basic either. I don't think he would beat an array of 4 amaran 200x S lights on light output or spectrum quality beyond the dimming method.


Wow, $2000 per lamp, yeah that's pricey.


Had the chance to see one of these in person - did not believe you could achieve “daylight indoors” before I did.


If you have a chance to chat with the staff again, I notice their marketing language says "Nearly perfect spectrum matching with daylight" - but they don't publish a Spectral Similarity Index. They only claim a (relatively low) CRI of 90+.

Edit: In other materials, they claim a very high CRI of 95+. Also the advertised wattage is sometimes 400W, other times 500W.


I have a 200W LED flood light and it was the most depressing thing to shine indoors. EVERYTHING was covered in dust and filth that you wouldn't see under normal-intensity light. It felt like things had collapsed and I was surveying the remains of someone's house.


500 watts! I won't need a heater any more if I turn one of these on. I had a 10k lumen led matrix lamp, but I found that it completely threw off my natural rhythm to sit under it for any length of time. It felt like it was perpetually early morning.


I'm 100% your audience for this, all I want is for it to be able to automatically adjust it's color temperature throughout the day and I'd replace every Hue bulb in my house with it - can it do that?


Yep you can schedule it to get brighter/dimmer and warmer/cooler from your existing [Matter compatible] smart home system, and with HomeKit adaptive lighting you can have it follow the sun.


Oh this is cool! Reminds me of led grow lights. You can get a panel with hundreds of LEDs on it for growing plants for like $200


I snagged a couple preorders upon seeing this comment, since I realized I forgot to do that before.


These are not the only 6 engineers working for DOGE, just the youngest. They have supervision as well.


How do we have any freaking clue what is going on with doge


They are all breaking the law.


Evidence? There is no evidence of that. Broad allegations that it is illegal doesn't cut it. Even Schumer is not making that claim. All he is doing is complaining. The executive branch has the power to police themselves it's not that difficult to understand that you can audit your own agency. There's nothing illegal going on.


Schumer literally said what they’ve done to USAID is illegal.

> …we know that unilaterally closing USAID is illegal.

[0]: https://www.democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/lea...


Which law, specifically?


The actual US constitution which gives Congress and ONLY congress the power to spend tax money. Musk has absolutely no legal authority to unilaterally stop payments approved by congress. What Musk is doing is a very intentional effort to usurp this authority illegally. Musk should really end up in prison or deported for what he is doing right now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_of_the_purse#United_Stat...

In the federal government of the United States, the power of the purse is vested in the Congress as laid down in the Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 (the Appropriations Clause) and Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 (the Taxing and Spending Clause).

The power of the purse plays a critical role in the relationship of the United States Congress and the President of the United States, and has been the main historic tool by which Congress has limited executive power.

https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/not-confident-trump-...

Not confident Trump will prevail: Scholar on his attempts to take Congress' power of the purse Professor Deborah Pearlstein joins Morning Joe to discuss her column for the NYT outlining some of Trump’s actions implemented in his first few days in office and why she says Trump is hardly the first president to claim broad executive power, but the difference is not just the enormity of his claims, it's that the administration mostly doesn't try to craft legal justifications for its actions.

https://www.marketplace.org/2025/02/04/congress-president-tr...

How Congress — and not the president — controls how taxpayer money is spent

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/01/trump-e...

‘It’s an Illegal Executive Order. And It’s Stealing.’


>the power to spend tax money

But they're not spending; they're kind of doing the opposite of spending. And reducing waste is a previously known (for a long time) goal of theirs.


Which is a direct violation of the constitution. Only congress the authority to control spending and Musk has absolutely zero authority to stop any payments congress has authorized. It is a naked power grab and musk should spend the rest of his life in prison for it.


>Only congress the authority to control spending

You changed your wording to fit your argument. "To spend" became "to control spending", implicitly acknowledging that the two phrases have different meanings.


The executive branch does not have the authority to cut off congressionally appropriated spending. Congress specifically passed a law (Impoundment Control Act) to make that as explicit as could be


They are... not spending tax money? If so, that would still be the only entity given power by the US Constitution to decide what to do with it.


First, I was showing that the specific claim being made (that Chuck Schumer has not said any illegal activities have taken place) was false. Nothing more.

Second, as I’m sure you know, and are being deliberately obtuse about, the separation of powers doctrine, which has been upheld by SCOTUS; one example [0] is Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer. USAID is codified by law, regardless of its genesis, and as such, only Congress is able to revoke the law.

[0]: https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep...


You must realize attacks made by political opponents are always exaggerated and many times false. First of all doge can’t close USAID. What “they” aka Trump did was pause payments for review.


I'm sure all of the people who depended on those payments and whose lives are now ruined will appreciate that subtle difference.


That isn't what they are actually saying.


Which is illegal


If you are finding the government is sending money to terrorists as they have indicated and need to stop it there are quite a few emergency powers. Pausing is the first step.


If you believe they found that I have a bridge to sell you


By who, other than Elon Musk, in turn accountable to no one?


I'm working on something like the lamp depicted in the images[0]. It's bright, diffuse, dimmable, flicker free, and high CRI.

[0]https://getbrighter.com


How would this compare to something like the Godox LA 200D, which claims an output of 100,000 lumens? I use two of these lights on tall stands pointed at my ceiling, which seems to work very well


They claim 101,000 lux, not lumens. Lux is light per square meter (roughly), lumens is total light output. The closer you get to the source, the higher the lux will be, so it's hard to compare lux equally. Based on their 230W power draw and typical COB efficiency, I'd guess it's 20,000-35,000 lumens.

Tldr, we're brighter, fanless, have adjustable color temperature, smart home compatible, and more aesthetic.


Appreciate the response!


It's so expensive.. And it uses a whopping 500W. Why not then just use a regular halogen standing floor lamp?


You get 6x less lumens/watt with a halogen lamp


Please help me understand a $1500 lamp...


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

Search: