Unlurker|Replay|About
Trained LLMs exclusively on pre-1913 texts (github.com/DGoettlich)
•
I’d like to know how they chat-tuned it. Getting the base model is one thing, did they also make a bunch of conversations for SFT and if so how was it done?
•
This is a neat idea. I've been wondering for a while now about using these kinds of models to compare architectures. I'd love to see the output from different models trained on pre-1905 about special/general relativity ideas. It would be interesting to see what kind of evidence would persuade them of new kinds of science, or to see if you could have them 'prove' it be devising experiments and then giving them simulated data from the experiments to lead them along the correct sequence of steps to come to a novel (to them) conclusion.
•
The sample responses given are fascinating. It seems more difficult than normal to even tell that they were generated by an LLM, since most of us (terminally online) people have been training our brains' AI-generated text detection on output from models trained with a recent cutoff date. Some of the sample responses seem so unlike anything an LLM would say, obviously due to its apparent beliefs on certain concepts, though also perhaps less obviously due to its word choice and sentence structure making the responses feel slightly 'old-fashioned'.
•
The time cutoff probably matters but maybe not as much as the lack of human finetuning from places like Nigeria with somewhat foreign styles of English. I'm not really sure if there is as much of an 'obvious LLM text style' in other languages, it hasn't seemed that way in my limited attempts to speak to LLMs in languages I'm studying.
•
There is. I have observed it in both Chinese and Japanese.
•
“Time-locked models don't roleplay; they embody their training data. Ranke-4B-1913 doesn't know about WWI because WWI hasn't happened in its textual universe. It can be surprised by your questions in ways modern LLMs cannot.” “Modern LLMs suffer from hindsight contamination. GPT-5 knows how the story ends—WWI, the League's failure, the Spanish flu.” This is really fascinating. As someone who reads a lot of history and historical fiction I think this is really intriguing. Imagine having a conversation with someone genuinely from the period, where they don’t know the “end of the story”.
•
smbc did a comic about this: http://smbc-comics.com/comic/copyright The punchline is that the moral and ethical norms of pre-1913 texts are not exactly compatible with modern norms.
1.5 TB of VRAM on Mac Studio – RDMA over Thunderbolt 5 (jeffgeerling.com)
•
The largest nodes in his cluster each have 512GB RAM. DeepSeek V3.1 is a 671B parameter model whose weights take up 700GB RAM: https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V3.1 I would have expected that going from one node (which can't hold the weights in RAM) to two nodes would have increased inference speed by more than the measured 32% (21.1t/s -> 27.8t/s). With no constraint on RAM (4 nodes) the inference speed is less than 50% faster than with only 512GB. Am I missing something?
•
Hey Jeff, wherever you are: this is awesome work! I’ve wanted to try something like this for a while and was very excited for the RDMA over thunderbolt news. But I mostly want to say thanks for everything you do. Your good vibes are deeply appreciated and you are an inspiration.
•
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4l4UWZGxvoc Seems like the ecosystem is rapidly evolving
•
> Working with some of these huge models, I can see how AI has some use, especially if it's under my own local control. But it'll be a long time before I put much trust in what I get out of it—I treat it like I do Wikipedia. Maybe good for a jumping-off point, but don't ever let AI replace your ability to think critically! It is a little sad that they gave someone an uber machine and this was the best he could come up with. Question answering is interesting but not the most interesting thing one can do, especially with a home rig. The realm of the possible Video generation: CogVideoX at full resolution, longer clips Mochi or Hunyuan Video with extended duration Image generation at scale: FLUX batch generation — 50 images simultaneously Fine-tuning: Actually train something — show LoRA on a 400B model, or full fine-tuning on a 70B but I suppose "You have it for the weekend" means chatbot go brrrrr and snark
•
Yea, I don't understand why people use LLMs for "facts". You can get them from Wikipedia or a book. Use them for something creative, write a short story on spec, generate images. Or the best option: give it tools and let it actually DO something like "read my message history with my wife, find top 5 gift ideas she might have hinted at and search for options to purchase them" - perfect for a local model, there's no way in hell I'd feed my messages to a public LLM, but the one sitting next to me that I can turn off the second it twitches the wrong way? - sure.
•
My expectations from M5 Max/Ultra devices: - Something like DGX QSFP link (200Gb/s, 400Gb/s) instead of TB5. Otherwise, the economies of this RDMA setup, while impressive, don't make sense. - Neural accelerators to get prompt prefill time down. I don't expect RTX 6000 Pro speeds, but something like 3090/4090 would be nice. - 1TB of unified memory in the maxed out version of Mac Studio. I'd rather invest in more RAM than more devices (centralized will always be faster than distributed). - +1TB/s bandwidth. For the past 3 generations, the speed has been 800GB/s... - The ability to overclock the system? I know it probably will never happen, but my expectation of Mac Studio is not the same as a laptop, and I'm TOTALLY okay with it consuming +600W energy. Currently it's capped at ~250W. Also, as the OP noted, this setup can support up to 4 Mac devices because each Mac must be connected to every other Mac!! All the more reason for Apple to invest in something like QSFP.
•
Apple has always sucked at properly embracing properly robust tech for high-end gear. When Xserves existed, they used commodity IDE drives without HA or replaceable PSUs that couldn't compete with contemporary enterprise servers.
•
> TOTALLY okay with it consuming +600W energy The 2019 i9 Macbook Pro has entered the chat.
Two kinds of vibe coding (davidbau.com)
•
There's something wrong with this vibe coded stuff, any kind of it. _It limps faster than you can walk_, in simple terms. At each model release, it limps faster, but still can't walk. That is not a good sign. > Do we want this? No. However, there's a deeper question: do people even recognize they don't want this?
•
Am I the only one who, rather than being impressed, is recoiling in horror?
•
I asked absurd question to chatgpt 4o when it came out, by mixing haskell and lisp books terminology (say design an isomorphic contravariant base class so that every class fills <constraint>). The result was somehow consistent and it suddenly opened my brain to what kind of stupid things i could explore. Felt like I became a phd wannabe in 5 minutes
Aaargh, I hate it when useful terms get diffused to meaninglessness. No, there’s one kind of vibe coding. The definition of vibe coding is letting the LLM write the code and not looking at it. That’s what the word “vibe” is there for.
•
In that case, "blind" would be more accurate.
•
I agree with you that there is one original definition, but I feel like we've lost this one and the current accepted definition of vibe coding is any code is majority or exclusively produced by an LLM. I think I've seen people use the "vibe engineering" to differentiate whether the human has viewed/comprehended/approved the code, but I am not sure if that's taken off.
•
> Aaargh, I hate it when useful terms get diffused to meaninglessness. I think that when you say this, you have an obligation to explain how the term "vibe coding" is useful, and is only useful by the definition that you've become attached to. I think that the author is accepting that there's no such thing as the vibe coding that you've defined (except for very short and very simple scripts), and that in all other cases of "vibe coding" there will be a back and forth between you and the machine where you decide whether what it has done has satisfied your requirements. Then they arbitrarily distinguish between two levels of doing that: one where you never let the LLM out of the yard, and the other where you let the LLM run around the neighborhood until it gets tired and comes back. I think that's a useful distinction, and I think that the blog makes a good case for it being a useful distinction. I don't find your comment useful, or the strictness of definition that it demands. It's unrealistic. Nobody is asking an LLM to do something, and shipping whatever it brings back without any follow-up. If nobody is doing that, a term restricted to only that is useless.
•
I'm ngl, when I first heard "vibe coding" I immediately imagined programming from memory.
•
My mind went… elsewhere. Specifically, the gutter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledildonics
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
Show HN: Stop AI scrapers from hammering your self-hosted blog (using porn) (github.com/vivienhenz24)
•
One solution would be for the SE's to publish their scraper IP's and allow content providers to implement bot exclusion that way. Or even implement an API with crypto credentials that SE's can use to scrape. The solution is waiting for some leadership from SE's unless they want to be blocked as well. If SE's dont want to play perhaps we can implement a reverse directory, like ad blocker but it lists only good/allowed bots instead. Thats a free business idea right there. edit: I noticed someone mentioned google DOES publish its IP's, there ya go, problem solved.
•
Apparently Google publishes their crawler’s IPs, see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46294144#46320180
•
Reminds me of poisoning bot responses with zip bombs of sorts: https://idiallo.com/blog/zipbomb-protection
•
This is a very creative hack to a common, growing problem. Well done! Also, I like that you acknowledge it's a bad idea: that gives you more freedom to experiment and iterate.
•
I don't know if I can get behind poisoning my own content in this way. It's clever, and might be a workable practical solution for some, but it's not a serious answer to the problem at hand (as acknowledged by OP).
•
“as acknowledged by OP”: that’s funny, if you hadn’t added that to your comment I was about to point it out
•
This is a cute idea, but I wonder what is the sustainable solution to this emerging fundamental problem: As content publishers, we want our content to be accessible to everyone, and we're even willing to pay for server costs relative to our intended audience -- but a new outsized flood of scrapers was not part of the cost calculation, and that is messing up the plan. It seems all options have major trade-offs. We can host on big social media and lose all that control and independence. We can pay for outsized infrastructure just to feed the scrapers, but the cost may actually be prohibitive, and seems such a waste to begin with. We can move as much as possible SSG and put it all behind cloudflare, but this comes with vendor lock in and just isn't architecturally feasible in many applications. We can do real "verified identities" for bots, and just let through the ones we know and like, but this only perpetuates corporate control and makes healthy upstart competition (like Kagi) much more difficult. So, what are we to do?
•
At this point it seems like the problem isn’t internet bandwidth, but just expensive for a server to handle all the requests because it has to process them. Does that seem correct?
> scrapers can ingest them and say "nope we won't scrape there again in the future" Do all the AI scrapers actually do that?
•
Not all, stuff like unstable diffusion exists. But a good many, perhaps even most(?), certainly do!
*anime jackalgirl Also you mentioned Anubis, so it’s creator will probably read this. Hi Xena!
•
I checked Xe's profile when I hadn't seen them post here for a while. According to that, they're not really using HN anymore.
•
See this thread from yesterday or so: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46302496#46306025
We pwned X, Vercel, Cursor, and Discord through a supply-chain attack (gist.github.com)
This is a pretty scary exploit, considering how easily it could be abused. Imagine just one link in a tweet, support ticket, or email: https://discord.com/_mintlify/static/evil/exploit.svg . If you click it, JavaScript runs on the discord.com origin. Here's what could happen: - Your Discord session cookies and token could be stolen, leading to a complete account takeover. - read/write your developer applications & webhooks, allowing them to add or modify bots, reset secrets, and push malicious updates to millions. - access any Discord API endpoint as you, meaning they could join or delete servers, DM friends, or even buy Nitro with your saved payment info. - maybe even harvest OAuth tokens from sites that use "Login with Disord." Given the potential damage, the $4,000 bounty feels like a slap in the face. edit: just noticed how HN just turned this into a clickable link - this makes it even scarier!
•
Doesn't stealing the cookies/token require a non-HTTP-only session cookie or a token in localstorage? Do you know that Discord puts their secrets in one of those insecure places, or was it just a guess? I believe if you always keep session cookies in secure, HTTP-only cookies, then you are more resilient to this attack. I interviewed frontend devs last year and was shocked how few knew about this stuff.
•
if you set the cookier header right (definitely not always the case), this is true, but the javascript can still send requests that will have that cookie included, effectively still letting the hacker use the session as the logged in user
•
[delayed]
For a reflected XSS? Tell me who is paying that much for such a relatively common bug... To elaborate, to exploit this you have to convince your target to open a specially crafted link which would look very suspect. The most realistic way to exploit would be to send a shortened link and hope they click on it, that they are logged into discord.com when they do (most people use the app), that there are no other security measures (httponly cookies) etc No real way to use this to compromise a large amount of users without more complex means
•
It isn't about the commonality of the bug, but the level of access it gets you on the type or massive scale of the target. This bug you your blog? Who cares. This bug on Discord or AWS? Much more attractive and lucrative.
•
Yes, but this is not a particularly high access level bug. Depending on the target, it's possible that the most damage you could do with this bug is a phishing attack where the user is presented a fake sign-in form (on a sketchy url) I think $4k is a fair amount, I've done hackerone bounties too and we got less than that years ago for a twitter reflected xss
Could you elaborate on why not?
•
There's generally no grey market for XSS vulns. The people buying operationalized exploits generally want things that they can aim very specifically to achieve an outcome against a particular target, without that target knowing about it, and operationalized XSS vulns seldom have that nature. Your other potential buyers are malware distributors and scammers, who usually want a vuln that has some staying power (e.g. years of exploitability). This one is pretty clearly time-limited once it becomes apparent.
decided to make a new account to post: Mintlify security is the worse I have even encountered in a modern SaaS company. They will leak your data, code, assets, etc. They will know they did this. You will tell them, they will acknowledge that they knew it happened, and didn't tell you. Your docs site will go down, and you will need to page their engineers to tell them its down. This will be a surprise to them.
•
Yes, they were sloppy with GitHub credentials and their response was inadequate. Glad we migrated away from them.
While I would love that for the kid I dont think these companies care about security at all.
•
I think that's unfair to say about a company that pays bug bounties at all. A lot of other companies would have ignored the email for weeks or threatened legal action.
I struggle to understand the issue .. could someone help me out ? Ok, you got " https://discord.com/_mintlify/_static/hackerone-a00f3c6c/lmao.svg " to send a controlled payload But regular users will never hit " https://discord.com/_mintlify/_static/hackerone-a00f3c6c/lmao.svg ", so they will never execute your script I fail to understand how this can be exploited, by whom and in what conditions
•
It's hosted on the official domain. That means you have at least 2 options: a) chain in with another issue which allows to load that as a trusted resource, or b) scam people by directing them to an "official" post. Also you get discord cookies access.
This feels so emblematic of our current era. VC funded vibe coded AI documentation startup somehow gets big name customers who don't properly vet the security of the platform, ship a massive vulnerability that could pwn millions of users and the person who reports the vulnerability gets...$5k. If I recall last week Mintlify wrote a blog post showcasing their impressive(ly complicated) caching architecture. Pretending like they were doing real engineering, when it turns out nobody there seems to know what they're doing, but they've managed to convince some big names to use them. Man, it's like everything I hate about modern tech. Good job Eva for finding this one. Starting to think that every AI startup or company that is heavily using gen-ai for coding is probably extremely vulnerable to the simplest of attacks. Might be a way to make some extra spending money lol.
•
The issue is everyone loves to have everything fronted by a single domain. Most of xss is because of this basic flaw. All of this could have been avoided if discord didn't run their API docs through discord.com
I'm curious what caching architecture a docs site needs, it can't be more complicated than a standard fare CDN?
•
Here's the other post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46276313
Back in the day the US government would give you $20k-60k cash in a nice briefcase for this type of exploit. Just another thing big tech has ruined I suppose.
•
Apple gave me $47k back when I was 16 and it definitely changed my life. Was subsequently able to get out of my 3rd world country and pay for university in the UK. While the quality of education is disappointing, having a graduate visa makes it so much easier to get a job or start a business there.
The fact that SVG files can contain scripts was a bit of a mistake. On one hand, the animations and entire interactive demos and even games in a single SVG are cool. But on the other hand, it opens up a serious can of worms of security vulnerabilities. As a result, SVG files are often banned from various image upload tools, they do not unfurl previews, and so on. If you upload an SVG to discord, it just shows the raw code; and don't even think about sharing an SVG image via Facebook Messenger, Wechat, Google Hangouts, or whatever. In 2025, raster formats remain way more accessible and easily shared than SVGs. This is very sad because SVGs often have way smaller file size, and obviously look much better at various scales. If only there was a widely used vector format that does not have any script support and can be easily shared.
•
Wikipedia, which allows uploading media, deals with this by rendering svgs on the server side.
is santizing SVGs hard, or just everyone forgets they can contain js?
•
I gather from the HN discussion that it's not simple to disable scripting in an SVG, in retrospect a tragically missing feature. I guess the next step is to propose a simple "noscripting" attribute, which if present in the root of the SVG doc inhibits all scripting by conforming renderers. Then the renderer layer at runtime could also take a noscripting option, so the rendering context could force it if appropriate. Surely someone at HN is on this committee, so see what you can do!
Any notable examples you can share?
•
PDF was purposely a non-Turing adaptation of PostScript. Then they added JavaScript support.
"The script doesn't run unless the file is directly opened (you can't run scripts from (<img src="/image.svg">)."
•
It will run if its in an <object> tag.
Uh... Flash was a genuine firehose of security flaws. I mean, yeah, they patched them. So "battle tested security layer" isn't wrong in a technical sense. But, yikes, no.
•
The Flash revisionism I see around here occasionally is bizarre. No, Flash was terrible and killing it was good.
I looked into it for work at some point as we wanted to support SVG uploads. Stripping <script> is not enough to have an inert file. Scripts can also be attached as attributes. If you want to prevent external resources it gets more complex. The only reliable solution would be an allowlist of safe elements and attributes, but it would quickly cause compat issues unless you spend time curating the rules. I did not find an existing lib doing it at the time, and it was too much effort to maintain it ourselves. The solution I ended up implementing was having a sandboxed Chromium instance and communicating with it through the dev tools to load the SVG and rasterize it. This allowed uploading SVG files, but it was then served as rasterized PNGs to other users.
•
Shouldn't the ignoring of scripting be done at the user agent level? Maybe some kind of HTTP header to allow sites to disable scripts in SVG ala CORS?
> because there aren't existing business processes those vulnerabilities drop seamlessly into; they're all situational and time-sensitive. what's an example of an existing business process that would make them valuable, just in theory? why do they not exist for xss vulns? why, and in what sense, are they only situational and time-sensitive? i know you're an expert in this field. i'm not doubting the assertions just trying to understand them better. if i understand you're argument correctly, you're not doubting that the vuln found here could be damaging , only doubting that it could make money for an adversary willing to exploit it?
•
A remote code execution bug in ios is valuable - it may take a long time to detect exploitation (potentially years if used carefully), and even after being discovered there is a long tail of devices that take time to update (although less so than on android, or linux run on embedded devices that can’t be updated) That’s why it’s worth millions on the black market and apple will pay you $2 million dollars for it An XSS is much harder to exploit quietly (the server can log everything), and can be closed immediately 100% with no long tail. At the push of an update the vulnerability is now worth zero. Someone paying to purchase an XSS is probably intending to use it once (with a large blast radius) and get as much as they can from it in the time until it is closed (hours? maybe days?)
How China built its ‘Manhattan Project’ to rival the West in AI chips (japantimes.co.jp)
•
Good for them, I don't see this as a big deal other than my fear of west china invading china (taiwan! :) ). Don't get me wrong, I want the west to succeed, but a competition from China is exactly what is needed. They're building datacenters in arizona and india for TSMC because of this competition. I really hope we get past historical political rivalry and get along with China better. Competition is good, hostility sucks.
•
It's kind of nasty that a fresh society of capable people has the drive to achieve technological excellence and the incumbents do whatever they can to delay this, even though it's inevitable and there's a lot to gain by empowering them. All in the name of "they are not us". World has gained so much from modern Chinese industrial revolution. Why suddenly everyone got cold feet? Nobody was stopping Germany or Japan on their way up even though they were literal former enemies with history of brutal warfare. China never done anything even comparable to others.
Also interesting huge project: China is building a $116 billion dam which, according to Bloomberg, is expected to generate 70 GW, just to compare: UK whole capacity (de-rated) is around 70 GW. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAwJESmfy10
•
Chinese dam projects have not always gone well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure
They are acquiring parts to reverse engineer them and build their own
•
+ industrial espionage to be able to reverse engineer it at all .
With Nvidia scaling down their consumer GPU production [0] I wonder if we will see consumer GPUs shipping from China in the future. Western companies seem to be abandoning the consumer/prosumer market which will have bad implications for hobbyists and aspiring professionals down the line. [0] https://www.pcmag.com/news/nvidia-might-cut-rtx-50-gpu-supply-by-up-to-40-in-2026-due-to-memory-shortages
•
Is AMD abandoning consumer market though? They seem to be much less in demand by AI industry.
The NASDAQ line go up model is why the AI boom is happening and a major factor in why it is Western companies leading the charge. The more bigger issue is that the west refused to sell chips to China so they had to figure out how to make their own. And margin compression is what free markets do. That is one of the big motivators to putting free markets everywhere, the freer the market the more compressed the margins become. All the people working hard at crappy jobs start working hard at high paying jobs instead until the competition drives the money out of the sector. There is a theme in the industries China does well in - western regulators ban cut-throat competition, China competes very hard and wins. The situation at scale is pretty straightforward. Usually it is environmental or labour policy, so this case of the root cause being sanctions is a bit unusual. But, once again, how Nvidia is meant to compete in China when their best products can't be sold there?
•
> There is a theme in the industries China does well in - western regulators ban cut-throat competition, The problem is not regulation, it is the lack of it: anti-monopolist practices and deregulation of the finance industry has led us to insane bubbles, dead markets and extreme wealth concentration. Any competition gets bought, crushed, or undercut via bankrolling. This is what you get when the 0.0001% gets to pull the strings again. Must watch (3 parts): https://www.arte.tv/en/videos/103517-001-A/capitalism-in-america-the-cult-of-wealth-1-3/
•
Free markets suppose to compress margins, perfect market theoretically drive profits down to zero (aka involution). But you compress margin and you lose current western semi business model that is functionally monopoly suppliers/producers who can sustain 50%+ margins to keep their monopoly. Shed those margins down to 20% because competitor enters market, harder to fund R&D to keep lead, it's still "enough" to be profitable, but then western commercial companies have to think harder how to split that compressed margin between investors and R&D. Right now we know what this leads to. Investors get paid, companies beg for subsidies. Not that PRC companies aren't concerned, look at PRC stock capitlization, not nearly to the same degree.
•
Free markets? No, competition does that. Competition requires free markets but free markets don't guarantee competition.
Your analysis is out of date I think. This has already happened. Poor NXP just got their asses handed to them by the PRC. The fab they have in Italy looks nice but PRC has many of those.
•
Also Texas Instruments, STMicro, Onsemi, Microchip Tech, i.e. what PRC is doing after going big in mature nodes last few years they likely will also do in leading edge. IMO there's argument that since leading edge will definitely be strategically bifurcated PRC and western semi can pseudo collude to maintain higher margins, especially if PRC wants to claw back investment. But if western semi continues to drive economy/growth there's also incentive to weaponize margins.
Isn’t that mostly economics? I definitely prefer using Claude to GPT-OSS120B for a code assistant. I don’t know about you, but I don’t have $500,000 laying around to buy myself a DGX B200 with a TB of HBM and 2TB of system ram, nor the 14.3kW of power to run the thing.
•
But will you still be able to afford using it once you have to pay the real price ? Once the venture capital dries up and the dumping stops ?
It’s a good thing that Chinese companies have zero expertise in leveraging consumer demand for lower-end tech to develop know-how and catch up with the state of the art from Western-aligned companies and then economies of scale to surpass them in distribution.
•
They learn really fast. I will not take the past as a prediction of the future.
Is anyone here calling legislators about it to inform them of this? Does anyone here have leverage to affect strategy?
•
Oh, they know. The industry has been lobbying quite badly for exactly this to happen. Why spend a fortune on innovation when a few bucks of lobbying can get the government to ban your competition because "China bad"? As the comment you responded to said: it's all about the next quarterly profits. The fact that we are getting leapfrogged by China doesn't matter to those CEOs: that's a long-term thing, and it doesn't impact their next bonus.
It might be a bit nihilistic but at this point I don't think the current US administration has any strategy. In past administrations, it felt like even if there was a strategy, bureaucracy and lack of caring enough to do their job led to nothing happening. In this administration, it feels like there's no care for the rules so in theory a strategy could be pushed through... except there isn't one - literally whoever is the last person to talk to the president is the person who gets to set the direction.
•
> I don't think the current US administration has any strategy I 100% believe the strategy is to enlarge the Trump family's wealth, and it's been a wildly successful strategy (in the past year he's been able to create billions in wealth for his family [0]). At least this vaguely ties Trump's success to the success of the United States in a limited capacity. Completely destroying the US is not ideal for him, but it's clear all policy decisions being made are being done so based on their capacity to improve Trump's situation. We've been headed this direction long before Trump, from both parties, increasingly American policy is about what's good for American companies and in particular the people who own them. Now that pool has just shrunk a bit. 0. https://www.wsj.com/politics/trump-family-business-visualized-6d132c71
The whole “improve a game’s performance on the driver side” thing: does AMD simply not do that at all? Or just far less?
•
Frankly, this always seemed like dirty hacks - either the game or the drivers don't actually comply woth the graphics API and then the drivers need to hack around that. :P
Cuda is 20 years old and it shows. Time for a new language that fixes the 20 years of rough edges. The Guy (Lattner) who made LLVM is working on this: https://www.modular.com/mojo Good podcast on him: https://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/from-swift-to-mojo-and-high-performance
•
What I gather from this comment is that you haven't written CUDA code in a while, maybe ever. Mojo looked promising initially. The more details we got though, the more it became apparent that they weren't interested in actually competing with Nvidia. Mojo doesn't replace the majority of what CUDA does, it doesn't have any translation or interoperability with CUDA programs. It uses a proprietary compiler with a single implementation. They're not working in conjunction with any serious standardization orgs, they're reliant on C/C++ FFI for huge amounts of code and as far as I'm aware there's no SemVer of compute capability like CUDA offers. The more popular Mojo gets, the more entrenched Nvidia (and likely CUDA) will become. We need something more like OpenGL with mutual commitment from OEMs. Lattner is an awesome dude, but Mojo is such a trend-chasing clusterfuck that I don't know what anyone sees in it. I'm worried that Apple's "fuck the dev experience" attitude rubbed off on Chris in the long run, and made him callous towards appeals to openness and industry-wide consortiums.
The knowledge came from former ASML employees. I wonder if countries will sanction these individuals given the geopolitical implications of their assistance.
•
Why would Holland sanction people who switch jobs? Don't get me wrong, I can absolutely see how it might have happened if ASML had been an US company. I'm just not sure how you figure that it would happen in Europe.
Controversial and possibly politically incorrect take, but the People's Republic of China sends many, many, of its citizens to study at top universities and work at top companies all over the world. I'm sure even at sensitive defense related orgs too. While I am sure that the vast majority of them are just regular people, I'm also pretty sure there are True Believers amongst them whose mission is to go out into the world and enrich themselves with the skills and knowledge to bring back to China and further the CCP's goals. Some of them might even attain citizenship in the country they go to while inwardly retaining full allegiance to the PRC. Heck, I know people from other, friendly/allied countries who obtain US citizenship who, if you pose the hypothetical question "If your former country and the US got into a shooting war, who would you fight for?", they would pick their former country without hestitation. And despite public policy and rhetoric sometimes stating how the PRC is becoming a rival or even existential threat to the Liberal Democratic World Order (TM), the Western democracies don't do anything to secure things. And quite frankly, I don't know if there is anything that could be done, short of getting into... highly controversial territory. Which if the situation were reversed, the CCP would probably not bat an eye to do.
•
Is there any other way to see it than just we are too divided and 50% of our own people just think we are the bad guys? What you describe is so obvious but one political side in the US at least pretends this isn't happening and actively does anything they can to hamper any response to it. I would love to be convinced otherwise because I am also part of the division, I truly don't understand the other side at all.
•
Controversial take: Democracy and the US are awful at keeping secrets, and are incapable of winning by an information delta, if we followed your strategy we would surely be doomed. Our greatest advantages come when we work in the open, and share knowledge and empower ordinary people and the world with technology. As things stand, we are funneling our brightest minds into creating proprietary (secret) technologies... And it turns out the only people for whom the technology is uncopyable or secret are... American citizens. The "proprietary" technology is trivial to steal, and legal protections don't matter outside of our borders, the legal protections and subsidies afforded to those building proprietary (secret) technologies only deprives Americans of the ability to innovate, while in peer nations like China, individuals and startups are totally free to use and enjoy American technology without any restrictions.
•
We haven't always been awful at keeping secrets, see the actual Manhattan Project. I like the optimism of your proposal, but how would those US companies continue the same level of R&D investment without those extra profits? If the government just directly invests, then you've just become the enemy.
>for the rest of their lives You overestimate length of the western outrage. Anyway what's to sanction? Almost no country recognizes Taiwan. Diplomatically they changed one job in China to another
•
A good benchmark would be how long the west remains mad at Russia for invading Ukraine.
China know that the one child policy has fucked their demographics and that their future isn't as rosy as it might appear now
•
And that's more of the "propaganda narrative" (google that term) getting pounded at us from all channels over the past several years. It's so 1984 - remember when we were told they were growing too much and getting overpopulated and the planet was going extent any moment? So which one is it? Anyways, their population decrease will be offset by AI and automation all while they still pump out more honor students than the entire West combined. They'll be fine is what I'm saying.
•
Why would the nation that implemented the one-child policy be unable to implement a three child policy?
> even if they use older machines and run longer exposure times How do longer exposure times and older machines enable 2nm process nodes?
•
If you didn't care about exposure time, you could build 2nm chips with brute-force electron beam lithography. But the limited throughput confines EBL to research and very low-volume applications. ASML's EUV-based processes are what permit industrial-level scaling, ultimately because parallel beams of electrons repel each other while parallel beams of photons don't. I don't personally understand why suitable EUV light sources are so hard to build, but evidently, they are. It sounds like a big deal if China is catching up in that area.
Firefox will have an option to disable all AI features (mastodon.social)
This is exactly the kind of boring, unsexy feature that actually builds trust. It’s the opposite of the usual “surprise, here’s an AI sidebar you didn’t ask for and can’t fully disable” pattern. If they want people to try this stuff, the path is pretty simple: ship a browser that treats AI like any other power feature. Off by default, clearly explained, reversible, and preferably shippable as an extension. You can always market your way into more usage; you can’t market your way back into credibility once you blow it.
•
It is well-known as a result of the expert reports in US v Google that generally software users do not change defaults Thus, when a software vendor sets a default it is a clear signal of their intent Whereas providing an option or a setting that the user must locate and manipulate doesn't really mean much. Few users will never see it let alone decide to change it
•
My problem here is this; products are designed with a vision. If you are designing with 2-3 visions it won’t be that good, if you design with one vision (AI) then non-AI version of the product will be an after thought. This tells me non-AI version of it will suffer (IMHO)
The trust is built by not enabling this by default, and by not burying the "kill switch" somewhere in settings that non-power users will never find.
•
Currently disable switch is right next to AI chat bot settings. It’s pretty on your face.
•
Worse yet, burying in settings where they give a big disclaimer that they can (and often are) reset when the browser updates.
I'm going to chime in here, I think 1. This is great and Mozilla is listening to it's core fans and 2. I want Firefox to be a competitive browser. Without AI enabled features + agent mode being first class citizens, this will be a non-starter in 2 years. I want my non-tech family members/friends to install Firefox not because I come over at Christmas, but because they want to. Because it's a browser that "just works." We can't have this if Firefox stays in the pre-ai era. I know Mozilla doesn't have much good will right now, but hopefully with the exec shakeup, they will right the ship on making FF a great browser. While still staying the best foil to Chrome (both in browser engine, browser chrome, and extension ecosystem).
•
I totally agree. It’s just going to become an expectation that AI is in the browser. It’s so nice just to be able to ask the browser to summarize the page, or ask questions about a long article. I know a lot of people on Hacker News are hostile to AI and like to imagine everybody hates it, but I personally find it very helpful.
•
Considering pirating the whole internet and boiling the planet is required to summarize a single page in a mediocre manner, it’s understandable that people who knows how the sausages are made are against it.
Do you ever need a website you're visiting translated? Have you ever not understood a term or phrase on a website and had to go to wikipedia/urbandictionary/google to explain it? Have you ever wanted to do a 'fuzzy search' of a 300 page document (where you don't know the exact string of text to ctrl-f, but want to see where they talk about a particular topic)?
•
> Do you ever need a website you're visiting translated? Yes. Firefox and Chrome already offer this. > Have you ever not understood a term or phrase on a website and had to go to wikipedia/urbandictionary/google to explain it? Yeah. And? > Have you ever wanted to do a 'fuzzy search' of a 300 page document (where you don't know the exact string of text to ctrl-f, but want to see where they talk about a particular topic)? No because I ctrl-f for that topic/key words and find the text. These are incredibly poor AI sells...
•
>Yes. Firefox and Chrome already offer this. yes, both use machine learning methods to translate pages. You're already using AI and don't realize it.
•
Even if they didn't realize it, I don't believe they were arguing that firefox and chrome didn't/wouldn't use machine learning already, rather that they just thought the use cases you provided don't really sell the cost of having a full LLM integrated into every browser install.
•
"AI" as it's used nowadays is unfortunately usually a shorthand for LLM. When firefox talks about "AI features", I think most people interpret that as "LLM integration", not the page-translation feature that's been around for ages.
•
That’s different from an agentic browser in a few key ways. Most importantly it’s far more difficult for a bad actor to abuse language translation features than agentic browser features.
I hope Zen disables this by default, or completely removes it if that’s an option.
•
Such features should be disabled by default, but as a user of Zen, I really hope it'd be possible to enable AI features.
GPT-5.2-Codex (openai.com)
> It is still not great at debugging things. It's so fascinating to me that the thread above this one on this page says the opposite, and the funniest thing is I'm sure you're both right. What a wild world we live in, I'm not sure how one is supposed to objectively analyse the performance of these things
•
Give them real world problems you're encountering and see which can solve them the best, if at all A full week of that should give you a pretty good idea Maybe some models just suit particular styles of prompting that do or don't match what you're doing
But are those tests relevant? I tried using LLMs to write tests at work and whenever I review them I end up asking it “Ok great, passes the test, but is the test relevant? Does it test anything useful?” And I get a “Oh yeah, you’re right, this test is pointless”
•
Keep track of test coverage and ask it to delete tests without lowering coverage by more than let’s say 0.01 percent points. If you have a script that gives it only the test coverage, and a file with all tests including line number ranges, it is more or less a dumb task it can work on for hours, without actually reading the files (which would fill context too quickly).
I always wonder how people make qualitative statements like this. There are so many variables! Is it my prompt? The task? The specific model version? A good or bad branch out of the non-deterministic solution space? Like, do you run a proper experiment where you hand the same task to multiple models several times and compare the results? Not snark by the way, I’m asking in earnest how you pick one model over another.
•
I have sent the same prompt to GPT-5.2 Thinking and Gemini 3.0 Pro many times because I subscribe to both. GPT-5.2 Thinking (with extended thinking selected) is significantly better, it's not even close. I attribute this to thinking time, with GPT-5.2 Thinking I can coax 5 minutes+ of thinking time but with Gemini 3.0 Pro it only gives me about 30 seconds. The main problem with the Plus sub in ChatGPT is you can't send more than 46k tokens in a single prompt, and attaching files doesn't help either because the VM they use blocks the model from accessing files if there's 46k already in the context.
Can't see the original comment, is that about my usage of the "astounding" word? I am Ukrainian (not a native speaker), and it popped up subconsciously, but now that I see it it another comment – very likely I just read it, that's why indeed! Amazing
•
> Can't see the original comment, is that about my usage of the "astounding" word? It was indeed! > very likely I just read it I find myself doing it frequently. I'm even sure that's why I used indeed above after reading your comment - it wasn't intentional!
If anyone from OpenAI is reading this -- a plea to not screw with the reasoning capabilities! Codex is so so good at finding bugs and little inconsistencies, it's astounding to me. Where Claude Code is good at "raw coding", Codex/GPT5.x are unbeatable in terms of careful, methodical finding of "problems" (be it in code, or in math). Yes, it takes longer (quality, not speed please!) -- but the things that it finds consistently astound me.
•
Agree. Codex just read my source code for a toy lisp I wrote in ARM64 assembly and learned how to code in that lisp and wrote a few demo programs for me. The was impressive enough. Then it spent some time and effort to really hunt down some problems--there was a single bit mask error in my garbage collector that wasn't showing up until then. I was blown away. It's the kind of thing I would have spent forever trying to figure out before.
I think the issue is for them "quality, not speed" means "expensive, not cheap" and they can't pass that extra cost on to customers
•
The "quality" model can cost $200/month. They'll be fine.
"In my mind, they're hardly making any money compared to how much they're spending" everyone seems to assume this, but its not like its a company run by dummies, or has dummy investors. They are obviously making awful lot of revenue.
•
Revenue != profit. They are drowning in debt and go into more and more ridiculous schemes to raise/get more money. --- start quote --- OpenAI has made $1.4 trillion in commitments to procure the energy and computing power it needs to fuel its operations in the future. But it has previously disclosed that it expects to make only $20 billion in revenues this year. And a recent analysis by HSBC concluded that even if the company is making more than $200 billion by 2030, it will still need to find a further $207 billion in funding to stay in business. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/openai-partners-carrying-96-billion-120300663.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAALipYaGPcnEz5DQxjQ3RY1XfzdvtMd1d8fkD2C4ug1Setj4Okzn-CPmxi9LNtZGQ3l5Ievandz_4tsnXvR8OCWC-217J4rAJA0Fs8EY7zVgAgDExeakiyLP7CYKOWB1EoP5Z4ziGlNiMMQ3v_9LBrlBhEmXyezXZMfWA5MiTHaJT --- end quote ---
•
To me it seems that they're banking on it becoming indispensable. Right now I could go back to pre-AI and be a little disappointed but otherwise fine. I figure all of these AI companies are in a race to make themselves part of everyone's core workflow in life, like clothing or a smart phone, such that we don't have much of a choice as to whether we use it or not - it just IS. That's what the investors are chasing, in my opinion.
Agreed. The $20 plans can go very far when you're using the coding agent as an additional tool in your development flow, not just trying to hammer it with prompts until you get output that works. Managing context goes a long way, too. I clear context for every new task and keep the local context files up to date with key info to get the LLM on target quickly
•
do you mean running /compact often?
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
Texas is suing all of the big TV makers for spying on what you watch (theverge.com)
•
It's absurd, I've blocked outgoing connections for all home devices and appliances by default. The printer and TV were some of the worst culprits.
It's always amazing how many people plop anti-consumer comments out here. Like, of course you bastards deserve to be served ads on your own TV that you just paid $800 for. Because why? Because ... the market is wise, and "the market" is screwing us, so ... we must ... deserve to be screwed? Whatever is being offered to us must be the best deal we can get, because ... it's being offered to us? What drives this sentiment? Is it Stockholm Syndrome?
•
HN is a haven for principled libertarians but I don't see many such comments in this thread.
It should be illegal to set information collection settings to on by default. Being watched is considered a threat almost universally across all animals. you would be incredibly uncomfortable with someone wide-eyed staring you down and taking notes of your behavior, wouldnt you? This is what tech companies are doing to everyone by default and in many cases they actively prevent you from stopping them. It is the most insane thing that people only seem to mildly complain about.
•
Humans are intensely social creatures, and are not adapted to feel the same way about things done invisibly versus visibly. That's how you end up in weird situations where people know the pervasive spying we're subjected to is wrong, but can't muster the will to act on it most of the time. It's cases like these where "voting with your wallet" produces terrible results. On one end you have organized groups of people figuring out chinks in human instincts, and on the other you have an unorganized mass of people doing what feels right or is expedient. You need coordination on both ends for competition and optimization to play out and find an acceptable compromise.
I'm happy to see it. They should have included Roku in that too! > Roughly twice per second, a Roku TV captures video “snapshots” in 4K resolution. These snapshots are scanned through a database of content and ads, which allows the exposure to be matched to what is airing. For example, if a streamer is watching an NFL football game and sees an ad for a hard seltzer, Roku’s ACR will know that the ad has appeared on the TV being watched at that time. In this way, the content on screen is automatically recognized, as the technology’s name indicates. The data then is paired with user profile data to link the account watching with the content they’re watching. https://advertising.roku.com/learn/resources/acr-the-future-of-tv-and-audience-data I wouldn't be surprised if my PS5 was doing the same thing when I'm playing a game or watching a streaming service through it.
•
The PS5 doesn't need to, they get it all in metadata because they control the full stack — TVs do it because they have less control over sources.
•
Most likely case is that the tv is computing hash locally and sending the hash. Judging by my dnstap logs, roku TV maintains a steady ~0.1/second heartbeat to `scribe.logs.roku.com` with occasional pings to `captive.roku.com`. The rest are stragglers that are blocked by `*.roku.com` DNS blackhole. Another thing is `api.rokutime.com`, but as of writing it's a CNAME to one of `roku.com` subdomains. The block rates seem to correlate with watch time increasing to ~1/second, so it's definitely trying to phone home with something. Too bad it can't since all its traffic going outside LAN is dropped with prejudice. If your network allows to see stuff like that, look into what PS5 is trying to do.
•
> > Roughly twice per second, a Roku TV captures video “snapshots” in 4K resolution. Isn't that too much data to even begin to analyze? The only winner here seems like S3.
•
Time for me to get Apple TV.
•
As if it didn’t track your habits as well.
•
...it doesn't. Like, Apple knows what you're watching within the Apple TV app obviously. But it's certainly not taking screenshots every second of what it displaying when you use other apps -- which shows and ads you're seeing. Nor does Apple sell personal data. Other video apps do register what shows you're in the middle of, so they can appear on the top row of your home screen. But again, Apple's not selling that info.
That sounds so expensive it's hard to see it making money. You'd processing a 2fps video stream for each customer. That's a huge amount of data. And all that is for the chance to occasionally detect that someone's seen an ad in the background of a stream? Do any platforms even let a streamer broadcast an NFL game like the example given?
•
it's hashed on the tv then they compare hashes in aggregate
•
Are there video "thumbprints" like exists for audio (used by soundhound/etc) - IE a compressed set of features that can reliably be linked in unique content? I would expect that is possible and a lot faster lookup for 2 frames a second. If this is the case, the "your device is taking a snapshot every 30 seconds" sounds a lot worse (not defending it - it's still something I hope can be legislated away - something can be bad and still exaggerated by media)
•
There are perceptual hashing algorithms for images/video/audio (dsp and ML based) that could work for that.
•
You only need to grab a few pixels or regions of the screen to fingerprint it. They know what the stream is and can process it once centrally if needed.
•
The actual screenshot isn’t sent, some hash is generated from the screenshot and compared against a library of known screenshots of ads/shows/etc for similarity. Not super tough to pull off. I was experimenting with FAISS a while back and indexed screenshots of the entire Seinfeld series. I was able take an input screenshot (or Seinfeld meme, etc) and pinpoint the specific episode and approx timestamp it was from.
I don't think they mean that kinda streamer - the idea is the roku tv can tell you're watching an ad even if it's on amazon prime, apple tv, youtube, twitch, wherever, and associate the ad watching with your roku account to potentially sell that data somehow? That way they aren't cut out of the loop by you using a different service to watch something and still have a 'cut'.
•
It'd make sense if they're using streamer in a different sense than I'm used to. I see that's at the bottom of the definitions Google will produce.
•
Yeah I think they mean "user of a streaming service" here, which would more conventionally be user or watcher or so on.
So potentially completely noncompliant if used in a business. E.g. it may have HIPAA, top secret etc.
•
Yeah that’s why Webex is still in business. TVs are a great entry point to LANs.
•
Boardroom presentation TVs in publicly traded companies would yield insider information.
There's probably compact signatures extracted from the screenshots (color profiles, OCR, etc) which are then uploaded later in bulk. You don't need the full original image to be able to reliably uniquely identify the content if you have an index of it already.
•
I'm wondering if there is some sort of steganographic watermark that broadcasters are including in media, to enable stuff like this. Probably would need to be robust in the presence of re-encoding, more compression, etc..
•
This has been long solved by YouTube for detecting CP and other non-compliant videos.
>I never felt more motivated to pi-hole the TV. Or just disconnect from the internet entirely? You already have an apple tv. Why does your tv need internet access?
•
Some TVs have a dedicated mobile connection, there is a SIM card and baseband radio inside. Of course only they can use it, not you.
"If there were any significant number of people who would pay for a dumb high end TV, the market would sell them one." The problem is easily solved and I'm surpised more people don't do it. For years I've just connected a PVR/STB (set top box) to a computer monitor. It's simple and straightforward, just connect the box's HDMI output into a computer monitor. Moreover, PVR/STBs are very cheap—less than $50 at most, I've three running in my household. If one wants the internet on the same screen just connect a PC to another input on your monitor. This way you've total isolation, spying just isn't possible.
•
..and constant notifications that the network is not connected, that there are wifi APs nearby, do you want to configure one(?), and that it's been 157 days since the last software update, and that you should connect your tv to the internet to get newest bestest firmware with 'new features'.
•
This is okay if you want a small TV, and/or are willing to forgo the picture quality of a modern big TV.
I don’t agree with this. The only way this would make sense is if consumers were made aware of spying vs not spying prior to purchase. But TV manufacturers can change the TV’s behavior long after it is purchased. They can force you to agree to new terms of service which can effectively make the TV a worse product. You cannot conclude the consumer didn’t care.
•
This 'Wild West' is easily solved with decent consumer law. Spying could be shut down over night if laws levied fines on TV manufacturers pro rata—ie fines would multiply by the number of TV sets in service. If each TV attracted a fine two to three times the amount manufacturers received from selling its data the practice would drop stone dead. All it takes is proper legislation. Consumers just lobby your politicians.
•
We're past the point when most people can claim ignorance. And surely we have enough protection to at least defend against the "changed the terms and conditions after purchase" situation? They can't force me to do anything, and then stop working if I refuse.
The problem is that consumers are not savvy. They go to the store, and compare TVs based on features presented. Colors, refresh rate, size, etc. Its only when they get home (and likely not even right away) that they discover their TV is spying on them and serving ads. This is a perfect situation where government regulation is required. Ideally, something that protects our privacy. But, minimally something like a required 'nutrition label' on any product that sends our data off device.
•
a required 'nutrition label' This didn't work for GDPR cookie warnings.
As far as I know, there is nothing to prevent Samsung from selling you a TV, then sending out a software update in two years which forces you to accept a new terms of service that allows them to serve you ads. If you do not accept, they brick your TV. So it’s not a question of being savvy. As a consumer you can’t know what a company will choose to do in the future. The lawsuit seems to be about using ACR, not the presence of ads.
•
> If you do not accept, they brick your TV. That ought to be a slam dunk win in court. Especially since they probably won't show up to my local small claims court and I'll just send them the judgement.
Hope does spring eternal, doesn't it 8-/ If no one manufactures such a product, how does the "market" express this desire? Buying one toaster, that would last your lifetime, is easily manufactured today, and yet no company makes such a thing. This is true across hundreds of products. The fact is, manufacturing something that isn't shit, is less profitable, so what we're gonna get is shit. It doesn't really matter what people "want". This is true for toasters and TVs...
•
How often are you replacing toasters?
I've had the advertising settings disabled on my LG C2 for a while and yesterday I decided to browse the settings menu again and found that a couple new ones had been added and turned on by default. Good times.
•
I have a Hisense TV which recently did the same. It turned on personal recommendations and advertising. I have no idea where the ads are or how it works; I only use devices over HDMI. I'm sure the TV is spying on me incessantly nonetheless.
1.3076744e+12 -1 is a lot of categories to click.
•
1,307,674,368,000
And if you just add them to your spam filter, it won't even work easily, because they deliberately shift around the domains and subdomains they send from every so often.
•
I just use a unique address for each service. Any email that gets leaked or is getting unsubscribe resistant spam is added to /etc/postfix/denied_recipients :)
Why do you even need the United app? They have a website.
•
Boarding pass. For the airline apps, it probably is a good assumption that most people want to get a notification that their flight is delayed, or started boarding, etc..
Until they start using Sidewalk/LPWAN type things automatically instead of your home WiFi.
•
Pretty sure some already do this.
Perhaps the one thing Ken Paxton and I agree on.
•
Perhaps. But you also need to ask why Paxton is doing this as this case will vaporize as soon as that is accomplished. I would be much more optimistic if California were also signed onto this. Paxton, however, doesn't give one iota of damn about individual freedom. So, this is either a misdirection, shakedown or revenge. Unfortunately, we don't have Molly Ivins around anymore to tell us what is really going on here in the Texas Laboratory for Bad Government.
I wouldn’t call Texas libertarian. They have the most restrictive abortion rights, They tried to fire teachers who spoke bad about a racist podcaster https://www.texastribune.org/2025/09/15/texas-education-teacher-comments-charlie-kirk/ https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/11/charlie-kirk-quotes-beliefs Weed is still illegal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_in_Texas You can’t sell liquor on Sunday https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_laws_of_Texas There is a state law restricting what can be discussed in public schools https://www.texastribune.org/2025/12/02/texas-public-schools-dei-lgbtq-ban/ And he is pushing for schools to post the 10 commandments https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/attorney-general-ken-paxton-instructs-texas-schools-display-ten-commandments-accordance-texas-law
•
I guess I just don't understand people who face what should be welcome political surprise with extreme and hyperbolic negativity. It's a feature of this forum which honestly bothers me. It's entirely unproductive and strikes me as a bad faith effort to avoid giving credit to "the other side" even when they're enacting a policy which benefits us all.
Skills for organizations, partners, the ecosystem (claude.com)
•
I'd love to see way more interest, rigor, tooling, etc in the industry regarding Skills, I really think they have solved the biggest problems that killed Expert Systems back in the day. I'd love to see the same enthusiasm as MCPs for these, I think in the long term they will be much more important than MCPs (still complementary).
I feel inspired and would like to donate my standard for Agent Personas to the community. A persona can be defined by a markdown file with the following frontmatter: --- persona: hacker description: logical, talks about computers a lot, enjoys coffee, somewhat snarky and arrogant --- <more details here>
•
As groundbreaking as this is, it will never get traction without a LICENSE.md.
That's a context pollution problem, not an MCP problem. https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/advanced-tool-use
•
building a rag for searching correct MCP is a band-aid.
I'm yet to come across applications implementing A2A in real life.
•
Ive yet to come across applications implementing ANY AI framework in real life/production grade projects...
 Top