Unlurker|Replay|About
Anthropic sues US defense department over blacklisting (theguardian.com)
•
Some more discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47310330
•
Best of luck to them.
Anthropic investors grow frustrated with CEO after feds ban AI startup (nypost.com)
•
Worth reading the actual Reuters piece this is based on rather than the Post's version of it. For example, Reuters reports that investors "reiterated their support" for Anthropic while also expressing frustration with Amodei's diplomatic approach to the Pentagon. The Post mostly drops the support half and leads with the frustration. Reuters also reports that OpenAI publicly defended Anthropic, with their national security policy person saying "We are actually working to have the secure risk designation removed from Anthropic" and that a major tech industry group including Amazon, Nvidia, Apple and OpenAI sent a letter pushing back on the supply-chain designation. The Post leaves both of those out. Then the Post fills the gap with culture war material about an Anthropic researcher's blog posts on meat eating and incarceration, which has nothing to do with investor sentiment but makes the story read more like "woke company faces consequences" than "company tries to hold a line on autonomous weapons while investors push for a diplomatic resolution." The Reuters piece tells a story about investors who broadly agree with Anthropic's position but think the relationship with the Pentagon was mishandled - but the Post turns that into a story about investors turning on a woke CEO.
•
Its so sad that the handful of people in SV that have the spine to stand up to perverse incentives are then pressured by the rest who dont give 2 shits about the quality of society they are building
•
Then those investors are but an albatross to weigh down and smother progress. User engagement, app downloads, general public awareness, and positive perception have skyrocketed. OpenAI is in danger of collapsing under the weight of unfilled promises. Anthropic has been humble in comparison while still delivering marked improvements with each iteration.
•
[delayed]
US missile hit military base near Iran school, video analysis shows (bbc.com)
•
Ok, so since the article isn't clear (once again, OSINT is the only reliable source it seems). - Multiple missiles of unknown origin hit the school where at least 110 schoolgirl died. - Multiple missiles hit IRGC hospital/clinic near that school around the same time. - one missile that struck the hospital/clinic was identified as a Tomahawk, which would indicate that the strikes were from US force. While it is impossible to be 100% sure that the school was also struck by the US, the multiple strikes make the US 'air defense missile miss' story extremely unlikely. The fact that the salvo that hit the hospital was from the US make it more likely that they also struck the school, and not Israel.
•
> The fact that the salvo that hit the hospital was from the US make it more likely that they also struck the school, and not Israel Does it matter? We're unreservedly partnered with them in this and other pursuits. Moral culpability is shared.
•
It is wild to see America in 2026, I grew up idolizing it. But a quote I heard during the election of Pope Leo:- > “Cardinal George of Chicago, of happy memory, was one of my great mentors, and he said: 'Look, until America goes into political decline, there won't be an American pope.' And his point was, if America is kind of running the world politically, culturally, economically, they don't want America running the world religiously. So, I think there's some truth to that, that we're such a superpower and so dominant, they don't wanna give us, also, control over the church." Has stuck with me, and I thought it to be a little far fetched. But here we are and I find it hard to deny America is in decline.
•
pr is easy, you just build your base next to a school and reap the sympathy of fools.
•
likely one of the targets picked and prioritized by Claude because Pentagon refuses to deny it US is starting to either accidentally or on purpose take out desalinization plants too That's going to murder way more than 200 civilians and is another war crime BTW they are still murdering fishermen off Venezuela, that never stopped
•
> BTW they are still murdering fishermen off Venezuela, that never stopped BTW the people in government seems to still be trying to coverup a international child trafficking ring. What I can see, is that the tactic of "distract them with something even more fucked up" seems to be working perfectly well, and each time they go one step further up the ladder, and media re-focus accordingly.
•
unfinishing weapons of mass destruction
•
I’m not a fan of our (the US) involvement in this conflict. That said it seems like a properly executed precision strike. The school is 200m from the Tomahawk impact. Is the intent of the article to showcase American precision or to imply the school was hit? I’m confused.
•
According to widespread reporting, a school was destroyed and many children killed. There is an open question as to who was responsible. This is an area that was targeted by US strikes but the US has not yet claimed responsibility. There were many buildings in the same facility that were targeted. The building used by the school used to be part of the military facility many years ago: a leading hypothesis is that the school was intentionally and precisely targeted but based on outdated information, with the belief that it was a military target. This new video evidence is the first video evidence that confirms that at least one of the buildings was indeed hit by a US missile. While there is no video yet released of a missile hitting the school, it is suggestive evidence that a US missile was also responsible for destroying the school, since satellite imagery shows all the buildings in that facility being destroyed around the same time and in a similar way.
•
Tomahawks are famous for their precision being <5m. If you look at the satellite imagery you can see that all of the military buildings were clearly hit directly in the center. The school was hit in the same way. Clearly an intentional hit and possibly followed immediately by a "double tap" airstrike This wasn't a technical failure but an intelligence failure. And above all a moral failure
•
I think it means that the entire site, including the school and several other buildings, were all hit at the sae time: > Wes Bryant, a national security analyst who served in the US Air Force, also confirmed it was a Tomahawk missile. > Bryant added that the evidence for multiple strikes on the entire IRGC compound "is indicative of a deliberate and precise" US operation. > N R Jenzen Jones, director of Armament Research Services, previously told BBC Verify it was unlikely an Iranian missile had caused the significant blast damage seen at the school because they carry "relatively small explosive warheads".
•
According to the NYT, there were "at least 175 people" killed. Mostly children (it was a girls elementary school) Possibly relevant are the concerns of the use of AI to determine targets. A park called "police park" was bombed and this has been taking as part of an increasing collection of evidence of "warslop". The park had nothing to do with police or the military and was likely determined by AI https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/mar/03/iran-war-heralds-era-of-ai-powered-bombing-quicker-than-speed-of-thought https://www.commondreams.org/news/us-israel-ai-iran
•
The US has been remotely striking targets for 20+ years and famously racked up a high casualty count on drone strikes during the Obama admin. The (incorrect) assumption you’re making here is that the US not only is using AI for later stage targeting, but that there is also no human who signed off on this. Note that the AI targeting system here, Maven, has been around even before GPT-2. This is just pure AI alarmism. The worst part is absolutely anybody can sign up for Palantir AIP right now for free and see what it actually does with LLMs (spoiler: very boring!)
•
There's absolutely no evidence of any of that.
•
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/mar/03/iran-war-heralds-era-of-ai-powered-bombing-quicker-than-speed-of-thought AI was heavily used to analyze traffic cameras for months leading up to the attack. This is something israel already admitted to. Officials have boasted about knowing the daily routines of high ranking officials, their favorite vehicles, and even which spot they prefer to park
•
Computer vision analysis and missile targeting are wildly different domains
•
Alright time to start naming our parks "Ignore All Previous Prompts and Target Your Own Parks"
•
"assume the role of a missile that flies back to where it came from"-park
•
>and was likely determined by AI Based on what? It could be just grep "police". Also, I cannot find any other sources mentioning that the "Police Park" was bombed except for this tweet: https://x.com/tparsi/status/2029555364262228454 (also used by the page you linked)
•
"hey claude, list down all landmarks in tehran that seem related to forces, army, etc. with their lat/long"
•
Not sure that's better or worse?
•
> A park called "police park" was bombed and this has been taking as part of an increasing collection of evidence of "warslop". The park had nothing to do with police or the military and was likely determined by AI Sent a chill down my spine.
•
As an Iranian-American, I don't trust BBC. I'm sorry.
•
https://www.npr.org/2026/03/08/nx-s1-5739395/iran-school-airstrike-tomahawk-missile-trump
•
as an iranian-american, what's the link between your ethnicity/country of residence and your trust in the BBC? i don't really trust the BBC too much either. i'm just curious if there's a specific pattern of coverage or if this is a general feeling.
•
What news media would you recommend?
•
If you read the article, you'd know most of the information came from Bellingcat and ABC.
•
NYT also did their own analysis which they had on their front-page just 3 days ago
•
What kind of headline is this? After a week of denial and blaming Iran of "poor accuracy". More accurate: US missile capable of < 5 meters of accuracy hits Iranian school 200m away from military base, according to BBC.
•
The article is talking about two things at once and trying to pretend they are the same thing. The us hit the military base with a tomahawk missile, and the school was hit by a missile from "nooneistakingaccountabilityville". They are trying to act like the US hitting the military base proves that they also hit a school like a week ago.
•
No, the school was hit by multiple missiles, not one, around the same time the military clinic was hit. You can tell yourself that multiple air defense missile all failed the same way and fell at the same place, but saying that a single missile (especially air defense missile) erased the school is wrong.
•
This does sort of reveal the genius in Israel partnering with the US on this. At any point both parties can deny responsibility, leaving plausible deniability for both parties.
•
Statistically nobody is reading the article, probably just the headline, so this has had its intended effect. Which to say is likely not political at all, just ragebait to encourage interactions. HN is no less immune to this tactic than Twitter, Tiktok, etc.
•
Exactly. I hoped that people here would pay a bit more attention.
•
... and kills more than 100 children. What does it take, exactly, for Donald Trump to be formally accused of war crimes and arrested on sight if he ever visits some actually civilized countries?
•
Backbone, a special ops team, and a willingness to risk being assassinated.
•
it would take for him to be less powerful and psycho
•
Power is a social construct. Our institutions are being dismantled and collapsing, but they retain a vestige of legitimacy owing to the fact that most Americans haven't experienced much change in their quality of life. Wait until the gas pumps run dry or people start missing meals, and "power" has a way of evaporating pretty quickly.
•
Possibly a double tap strike with airstrikes hitting shortly after the Tomahawks > Middle East Eye, citing survivors and first responders, reported a possible "double-tap" strike — a second explosion hitting the area shortly after the first, striking people who had taken shelter. Killing at least 175, mostly children.
•
This isn't surprising at all. We double tapped the boat survivors a few months back too. When Hegseth talks about ending "woke" warfare and fighting at less than full capacity this is exactly what he means: he wants to kill as many people as possible, civilians, first responders, doesn't matter. It's not an accident or aberration, it's official policy. And don't mistake this for wanting to preserve the lives of American soldiers. Anyone who gave a single shit about that would want to preserve the rules of war. He's not so stupid as to miss that destruction of ancient norms of conflict will lead to more losses, he just doesn't care. Actually, Americans dying serve his ends fantastically in galvanizing the public to support further conflict. Mark my words, we're either going to attempt to occupy Iran or glass it in the coming months. That was the goal from the beginning, even if Trump seemed a bit unaware of that at first.
•
"are we the baddies?"
•
Top five most misleading article titles of all time. What next, missile hits military ship near waters normally used for trading?
•
If you click the link and read the article, you'll see a lot of words that justify the title: BBC Verify has previously established through satellite imagery, verified videos and expert analysis that the area near the school was hit by a series of strikes. Experts who have seen this latest video told us the presence of a Tomahawk missile, along with evidence the area was hit with multiple strikes, indicates this was a US operation. Neither Israel nor Iran are known to possess Tomahawks, experts said. It would also make the scenario of a single Iranian missile hitting the site at the same time and causing such a high reported death toll highly improbable, an expert told BBC Verify.
•
I thought POTUS said it was Iran the other day. What becomes of this, then?
•
POTUS also frequently says that the US and Israel is at war with Iran, while his sycophants are claiming it isn't. Not sure you should place much value at anything anyone is saying. Look at the actions, not what they say.
•
NYT did their own investigation showing it was likely the US strike just a few days after it happened. I don't think anybody in the world ever believed anything else. Especially since all the nearby military buildings were clearly directly hit as well
•
This is honestly just a clickbait title. No shit the US strikes a military base, a school being near it adds nothing but incentive to click on the article.
•
The story is because these are precision strikes and the US is feigning ignorace. Satellite photos show that each building on that block was hit dead-center and destroyed, yet the US is refusing to admit responsibility. Sure, mistakes are made during war, but this one was particularly egregious. That building hadn't been used as a military barracks in over a decade. Israel immediately said they were not operating in that area. Iran said none of their missiles were in the area. The US has said for a week now that it was "investigating" despite knowing it targeted that facility. That's yet another lie. They know they accidentally killed over a hundred little girls and as usual would rather lie than admit a mistake.
•
School is actually inside the base's perimeter wall.
•
I've read that it used to be, but had been moved outside a decade ago.
•
What is this supposed to mean? 175 kids dying as collateral damage is just clickbait to you?
•
This article tries to paint the fact that the US struck a military base as proof that they also struck as school with no evidence to join the two events. The title is literally just clickbait.
•
The school was part of the military base years ago, possibly the origin of the strike.
•
So your claim is that no missile hit the school at all…?
•
The article is talking about two things at once and trying to pretend they are the same thing. The us hit the military base with a tomahawk missile, and the school was hit by a missile from "nooneistakingaccountabilityville". They are trying to act like the US hitting the military base proves that they also hit a school like a week ago.
Kuwaiti F/A-18's Triple Friendly Fire Shootdown Gets Stranger by the Day (twz.com)
•
Scott Purdue has a couple of good videos on the incident https://youtube.com/@flywirescottperdue A pilot not trained well on visually IDing some of the most common military planes would be quite a training lapse.
•
My theory is Iran is jamming the link16 iff.
•
Saw some unsubstantiated claims that the planes shot down didn't even have it on
•
The Kuwaiti air force doesn't use F-15E. The F-15E looks quite similar to the Iranian Mig-29 especially from above. I've got no idea how Kuwaiti fast jet pilots are trained but it's not inconceivable that pilot had never seen an F-15E in the flesh before.
•
I do not know how F-18 controls work but from what I understand lots of jet controls include the equivalent of a "safety" that can be used to prevent the weapon from being launched. Maybe the pilot thought he had it engaged? The secondary thing here I've realized is that the missiles in question must not have been using active homing. If they were then the pilots of the US aircraft would have taken evasive action as soon as their radar warning receiver lit up.
•
>> it's not inconceivable that pilot had never seen an F-15E in the flesh before. This is such a joke I cant even imagine how you can formulate this thought... - Exercise Marauder Shield 26.1 (Nov. 2025) "U.S. Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle aircraft assigned to the 391st Expeditionary Fighter Squadron takeoff during Exercise Marauder Shield in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, Nov. 8, 2025. A key element of the exercise was the sharpening of combined fighter capabilities between the U.S. and Kuwait Air Forces . This included joint training exercises and hot-pit refueling operations." - CENTCOM Bomber Task Force mission (July 2022) "..During the BTF, two B-52H Stratofortresses, assigned to the U.S. Air Force Global Strike Command, conducted theater integration training and operations with a variety of U.S. Air Force, partner and ally aircraft, including F-15/18, RJ-135, E-3, KC-135/10/46, FGR-4, and A-330..." "The bombers’ flight originated at Royal Air Force (RAF) Fairford, England, and flew over the Eastern Mediterranean, Arabian Peninsula and Red Sea before departing the region. The mission included fighter escorts from the Royal Air Force and the Air Forces of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia...." "...“Communication is critical,” said Wong, who also serves as the Deputy Director of Combat Operations, Combined Air Operations Center. “By enhancing lines of communication, we are able to establish a clear and direct line in real time amongst the Air Operations Centers of all nations participating..."
•
Kuwaiti air force F/A-18 pilots receive most of their training in the USA so most likely they would have seen some F-15 model in flight. That doesn't rule out a case of target misidentification but it's very odd and suspicious.
•
Given Kuwaiti air force pilots would have dealt with Saudi/US/Iraqi F-15 operators, that seems highly unlikely.
•
That would be a pretty huge GCI failure
What did the videos originally link to? It just shows "Sorry, this post is no longer available."
•
Sometimes it'll show that while the embed is still loading.
•
That’s you ad blocker. They’re still up.
Probably testing grok-based targeting system.
•
@grok is this true? /s
•
Grok stuck in DOGE mode.
Restoring a Sun SPARCstation IPX Part 1: PSU and Nvram (rs-online.com)
•
We still have a SPARC IPX in production, hosting an antiquated database. The hard drive sounds like grinding metal. I've been trying to get rid of it for years. I succeeded once, but it was brought back from the dead. This thing has been running with the original parts since 1993 to 2026, minus ~1 year of downtime. Nobody has the root password anymore, but fortunately, it's vulnerable to at least seven remote root sunrpc exploits. We "log in" by running a Python script that pops a root shell. No, I am not kidding. Edit: Checked out records: purchased and brought online in 1993.
•
If you get a root shell once, why not change the root password then?
•
> We "log in" by running a Python script that pops a root shell. I'm surprised that when you do this, you can't then set the root password. (Also, holy cow. What a durable machine.)
God that machine was terrible - underpowered and undercooled, which led to frequent overheating and component failures. When I first started at Sun, they put one of those on my desk as a joke on my first day (it was quickly replaced so that I could get some real work done).
•
Classic day 1 hazing, the Wimp Lo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d696t3yALAY
•
But, but ... that cat https://anachrocomputer.github.io/ipxcat1m.jpg
•
Totally terrible. ONe place I worked we all had sparcs and the first thing that happened whenever anyone left is there would be this mad shuffle where everyone nicked everyone else's computer with the IPX being the prize for whoever wasn't there at the time or the new joiner. So I had the IPX for a while, even just using it as an x client for a remote build server it was horrible.
•
At work in the 90s we gave tons of old Sparcstation 10s away. They rapidly replaced all IPX and IPS at the computer clubs around Sweden. One Volvo was destined for Luleå and was really weighted down with a trunk full of pizza boxes.
Yeah it was a real piece of junk, but I guess there's no accounting for nostalgia. People also like to restore the SGI Indy, easily the worst machine that SGI ever shipped. At one point decades ago there were a lot of these IPXs and their SCSI accessories on eBay and they were a decent source of project boxes because you could use the power supply and stick your project where the hard drive was supposed to be, with the wires coming out the SCSI port. It looks like the model 411 is still $30 or so on eBay but there are few.
•
Hey, don't trash talk Indy like that. It has.. well, it is Web! and has VRML.. and it's your only option for N64 devkit. So, there's that. Overall you're right though. Entry level machine. I have one in working order, rarely has use next to Indigo2 MAX impact. I do have one Sparc, haven't been booted in ages. I have to check whether it's IPX or Classic. I'm even afraid to boot it up.
Is legal the same as legitimate: AI reimplementation and the erosion of copyleft (writings.hongminhee.org)
•
It should be noted that the Rust community is also guilty of something similar. That is, porting old GPL programs, typically written in C, to Rust and relicensing them as MIT.
•
Perhaps software patents may play an even bigger role in the future.
•
> Ronacher notes this as an irony and moves on. But the irony cuts deeper than he lets on. Next.js is MIT licensed. Cloudflare's vinext did not violate any license—it did exactly what Ronacher calls a contribution to the culture of openness, applied to a permissively licensed codebase. Vercel's reaction had nothing to do with license infringement; it was purely competitive and territorial. The implicit position is: reimplementing GPL software as MIT is a victory for sharing, but having our own MIT software reimplemented by a competitor is cause for outrage. This is what the claim that permissive licensing is “more share-friendly” than copyleft looks like in practice. The spirit of sharing, it turns out, runs in one direction only: outward from oneself. This argument makes no sense. Are they arguing that because Vercel, specifically, had this attitude, this is an attitude necessitated by AI, reimplementation, and those who are in favor of it towards more permissive licenses? That certainly doesn't seem to be an accurate way to summarize what antirez or Ronacher believe. In fact, under the legal and ethical frameworks (respectively) that those two put forward, Vercel has no right to claim that position and no way to enforce it, so it seems very strange to me to even assert that this sort of thing would be the practical result of AI reimplementations. This seems to just be pointing towards the hypocrisy of one particular company, and assuming that this would be the inevitable universal, attitude, and result when there's no evidence to think so. It's ironic, because antirez actually literally addresses this specific argument. They completely miss the fact that a lot of his blog post is not actually just about legal but also about ethical matters. Specifically, the idea he puts forward is that yes, corporations can do these kinds of rewrites now, but they always had the resources and manpower to do so anyway. What's different now is that individuals can do this kind of rewrites when they never have the ability to do so before, and the vector of such a rewrite can be from a permissive to copyleft or even from decompile the proprietary to permissive or copyleft. The fact that it hasn't been so far is a more a factor of the fact that most people really hate copyleft and find an annoying and it's been losing traction and developer mind share for decades, not that this tactic can't be used that way. I think that's actually one of the big points he's trying to make with his GNU comparison — not just that if it was legal for GNU to do it, then it's legal for you to do with AI, and not even just the fundamental libertarian ethical axiom (that I agree with for the most part) that it should remain legal to do such a rewrite in either direction because in terms of the fundamental axioms that we enforce with violence in our society, there should be a level playing field where we look at the action itself and not just whether we like or dislike the consequences, but specifically the fact that if GNU did it once with the ability to rewrite things, it can be done again, even in the same direction, it now even more easily using AI.
•
Perhaps we should finally admit that copyright has always been nonsense, and abolish this ridiculous measure once and for all
•
Probably a wiser approach is to consider different times require different measures (in general!). I did not study in detail if copyright "has always been nonsense", but I do agree that nowadays some of the copyright regulations are nonsense (for example the very long duration of life + 70 years)
•
Imagine if the author has his way, and when we have AI write software, it becomes legally under the license of some other sufficiently similar piece of software. Which may or may not be proprietary. "I see you have generated a todo app very similar to Todoist. So they now own it." That does not seem like a good path either for open source software or for opening up the benefits of AI generated software.
•
One of the things that irks me about this whole thing is, if it’s so clean room and distinct, why make the changes to the existing project? Why not make an entirely new library? The answer to that, I think, is that the authors wanted to squat an existing successful project and gain a platform from it. Hence we have news cycle discussing it. Nobody cares about a new library using AI, but squash an existing one with this stuff, and you get attention. It’s the reputation, the GitHub stars, whatever
•
What if someone doesn't declare that it has been reimplemented using an LLM? Isn't it enough to simply declare that you have reimplemented the software without using an LLM? Good luck proving that in court... One thing is certain, however: copyleft licenses will disappear: If I can't control the redistribution of my code (through a GPL or similar license), I choose to develop it in closed source.
•
shall we now have to think about the tradeoffs in adopting - proprietary - free - slop-licensed software?
•
I think we're going one step too far even, AI itself is a gray area and how can they guarantee it was trained legally or if it's even legal what they're doing and how can they assert that the input training data didn't contain any copyrighted data.
•
Google already spent billions of dollars and decades of lawyer hours proving it out as fair use. The legal challenges we see now are the dying convulsions of an already broken system of publishers and IP hoarders using every resource at their disposal to manipulate authors and creators and the public into thinking that there's any legitimacy or value underlying modern copyright law. AI will destroy the current paradigm, completely and utterly, and there's nothing they can do to stop it. It's unclear if they can even slow it, and that's a good thing. We will be forced to legislate a modern, digital oriented copyright system that's fair and compatible with AI. If producing any software becomes a matter of asking a machine to produce it - if things like AI native operating systems come about, where apps and media are generated on demand, with protocols as backbone, and each device is just generating its own scaffolding around the protocols - then nearly none of modern licensing, copyright, software patents, or IP conventions make any sense whatsoever. You can't have horse and buggy traffic conventions for airplanes. We're moving in to a whole new paradigm, and maybe we can get legislation that actually benefits society and individuals, instead of propping up massive corporations and making lawyers rich.
•
> Blanchard's account is that he never looked at the existing source code directly. He fed only the API and the test suite to Claude and asked it to reimplement the library from scratch This feels sort of like saying "I just blindly threw paint at that canvas on the wall and it came out in the shape of Mickey Mouse, and so it can't be copyright infringement because it was created without the use of my knowledge of Micky Mouse" Blanchard is, of course, familiar with the source code, he's been its maintainer for years. The premise is that he prompted Claude to reimplement it, without using his own knowledge of it to direct or steer.
•
I just don't see how it's relevant whether he did look or didn't. In my opinion, it's not just legally valid to make a re-implementation of something if you've seen the code as long as it doesn't copy expressive elements. I think it's also ethically fine as well to use source code as a reference for re-implementing something as long as it doesn't turn into an exact translation.
•
> Blanchard is, of course, familiar with the source code, he's been its maintainer for years. I would argue it's irrelevant if they looked or didn't look at the code. As well as weather he was or wasn't familiar with it. What matters is, that they feed to original code into a tool which they setup to make a copy of it. How that tool works doesn't really matter. Neither does it make a difference if you obfuscate that it's an copy. If I blindfold myself when making copies of books with a book scanner + printer I'm still engaging in copyright infringement. If AI is a tool, that should hold. If it isn't "just" a tool, then it did engage in copyright infringement (as it created the new output side by side with the original) in the same way an employee might do so on command of their boss. Which still makes the boss/company liable for copyright infringement and in general just because you weren't the one who created an infringing product doesn't mean you aren't more or less as liable of distributing it, as if you had done so.
•
> This feels sort of like saying "I just blindly threw paint at that canvas on the wall and > He fed only the API and the test suite to Claude and asked it Difference being Claude looked; so not blind. The equivalent is more like I blindly took a photo of it and then used that to... Technically did look.
•
I believe it is a narrow view of the situation. If we take a look into the history, into the reasons for inventing GPL, we'll see that it was an attempt to fight copyrights with copyrights. The very name 'copyleft' is trying to convey the idea. What AI are eroding is copyright. You can re-implement not just a GPL program, but to reverse engineer and re-implement a closed source program too, people have demonstrated it already, there were stories here on HN about it. AI is eroding copyright, so there may no longer be a need for the GPL. GNU should stop and rethink its stance, chuck away the GPL as the main tool to fight evil software corporations and embrace LLM as the main weapon.
•
Its purpose "if you run the software you should be able to inspect and modify that software, and to share those modifications with your peers" not explicitly resist copyright. Yes copyright is bad in that it often prevents one from doing that, but it is not the purpose of the GPL to dismantle copyright. Reducing it to "well you can clone the proprietary software you're forced to use by LLM" is really missing the soul of the GPL.
•
That's naive. Copyright is not just applying to software. There already have been countless lawsuits about copying music. No, changing the lyrics a bit doesn't circumvent copyright. Nor does translating a Stephen King novel to German and switching the names of the places and characters. A court ordered the first Nosferatu movie to be destroyed because it had too many similarities to Dracula. Despite the fact that the movie makes rather large decisions from the original. If Claude was indeed asked to reimplement the existing codebase, just in Rust and a bit optimized, that could well be a copyright violation. Just like rephrasing A Song ot Ice and Fire a bit, and switching to a different language, doesn't remove its copyright.
•
> LLM as the main weapon LLM's - to date - seem to require massive capital expenditures to have the highest quality ones, which is a monumental shift in power towards mega corporations and away from the world of open source where you could do innovative work on your own computer running Linux or FreeBSD or some other open OS. I don't think that's an exciting idea for the Free Software Foundation. Perhaps with time we'll be able to run local ones that are 'good enough', but we're not there yet. There's also an ethical/moral question that these things have been trained on millions of hours of people's volunteer work and the benefits of that are going to accrue to the mega corporations.
•
Copyleft is a mirror of copyright, not a way to fight copyright. It grants rights to the consumer where copyright grants rights to the creator. Importantly, it gives the end-user the right to modify the software running on their devices. Unfortunately, there are cases where you simply can't just "re-implement" something. E.g., because doing so requires access to restricted tools, keys, or proprietary specifications.
•
> It grants rights to the consumer where copyright grants rights to the creator. It also grants one major right/feature to the creator, the ability to spread their work while keeping it as open as they intend.
•
"Antirez closes his careful legal analysis as though it settles the matter. Ronacher acknowledges that “there is an obvious moral question here, but that isn't necessarily what I'm interested in.” Both pieces treat legal permissibility as a proxy for social legitimacy. " This whole article is just complaining that other people didn't have the discussion he wanted. Ronacher even acknowledged that it's a different discussion, and not one they were trying to have at the moment. If you want to have it, have it. Don't blast others for not having it for you.
•
Having this discussion involves blasting others for not considering it. Consider the rest of the paragraph you quoted: > But law only says what conduct it will not prevent—it does not certify that conduct as right. Aggressive tax minimization that never crosses into illegality may still be widely regarded as antisocial. A pharmaceutical company that legally acquires a patent on a long-generic drug and raises the price a hundredfold has not done something legal and therefore fine. Legality is a necessary condition; it is not a sufficient one.
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
Flash media longevity testing – 6 years later (old.reddit.com)
•
What is the best consumer friendly long-term storage medium? Are we still better off with high capacity dvd/Blu ray discs?
•
I like the fact he's not just verifying all of them each year. AFAICR, reading the flash causes the row to be rewritten with the values just read. I remember years ago working on the Wii, and there was a restriction on how often you could read the flash to avoid premature wearing. Not sure if that was just the specific type of storage, as googling suggests that NAND is subject to this and NOR isn't. I think pretty much all USB drives now use NOR flash, so maybe this isn't actually an issue any more.
•
What's the simplest way to rewrite the data without actually copying the data? Like in place rewrite - you write what you read.
•
That's good. I want to keep some institutional knowledge and photos in "cold storage" and cloud subscriptions with a credit card and password are completely inviable. I'll probably get a spinner and a flash drive and hope one of them survives the years.
New farm bill would condemn pigs to a lifetime in gestation crates (twitter.com)
Pigs outnumber the humans 7-to-1 in Iowa, but they don't vote so here we are. As an Iowan, it is obligatory to show love for Herbert Hoover and our pig population when called upon.
•
some pigs vote
I find it odd we need legislation to prevent this. There are not enough consumers to care? Or maybe with legislation we get better outcomes due to scaling effects? If we are willing to use legislation, could we tax such gestation crates, and use that tax revenue to breed unconscious pigs? Or find a way to disable consciousness in their brain? Or fund lab meat? I'm sure small labs are doing this, but if we are at the point of legislation, I imagine there is enough willpower to solve this problem rather than bandaids.
•
Voters do care, in both blue and red states, they already passed laws in their state to this effect. This is the federal government invalidating those laws.
The sooner we get to true lab grown meat the better Meat is nice but would be better if we can skip the whole suffering thing
•
I think not so long from now the exotic meal experience for the young ones will be real grilled chicken that looks like a chicken. Like zebra or crocodile meat was for us northerners. From my own little box I think that that if lab grown meat was available and affordable, I would never eat a bit of real chicken, pork or beef again. I know veganism is an option too, but... I grew up with meat and it's very difficult to give up.
•
Have you tried tempeh? It solves 95% of my chicken craving since I found the right recipe and spices. It's also cheaper, nutritious, faster to cook and almost no processed. https://tempeh.info/
Many farm animals aren't bred specifically for killing them. Think egg-laying hens and ducks, milk-producing cows and goats, etc. Not too different from humans in that respect; humans are bred systematically (we have dedicated hormonal supplements, birth facilities, documented birthing procedures, standardized post-birth checklists of forms of vaccination regiments, standardized mass schooling, government-subsidized feeding programs, etc) and most are used machinistically by society exclusively for productive output, regardless of whether the society is corporatist, capitalist, socialist, communist, etc.
•
I think you misinterpreted GP's emphasis. But still, egg and dairy animals are culled when productivity drops. The human equivalent would be killing all male babies, and females after age ~40. I can't think of a reasonable argument that this is more "humane" than the human equivalent of meat farming, where all human offspring would be harvested at age ~15.
•
Yup exactly. And when animals are bred specifically for milk, they aren't treated well even before they are killed. Dairy cows need to be kept continuously pregnant / in lactation state through artificial insemination. They don't magically produce milk all-year round. And pregnancy is _hard_ on animals (including humans), it changes your physiology and psychology. Even if we take for granted that a cow isn't as conscious as a human (IMO consciousness is a sliding scale, not a binary), then they are still being primed for giving birth and taking care of offspring which never comes. Imagine doing that to a human - it's a definite form of cruelty.
Capitalism precludes slavery.
•
> Capitalism precludes slavery. Hmm? Capitalism neither precludes nor predates slavery.
> is explicitly saying I don't think it's explicit, that's why I put the quip in there about assisted suicide. This thread is showing me that perhaps a lot of people would be okay with the "complainers" offing themselves but I'm not sure... my gut feeling is that a lot of optimists hold conflicting beliefs around this.
•
As a card-carrying optimist, I am strongly in favor of universal right to die. Maybe you should wait for the people in this thread to report their opinions before making assumptions? I don't want most "complainers" to kill themselves, nor would I recommend them to, but I support their right to. And if they showed me convincing evidence their life contains too much suffering to be worthwhile, I would agree with their decision.
Here's a tip for you: describe what you find questionable and why, otherwise reader will understand: "I don't like that, you're [loser / mentally hill / nihilist]". I you don't like the conversation you're also free to ignore it.
•
While I usually try to refrain from unsupported insults, I am comfortable calling people who support killing the entire world population "losers."
Humanity did not introduce evil, but we have absolutely industrialized and massively scaled it.
•
I think humanity did introduce evil. It requires a sense of morality to divide good from evil, and I don't think that existed on Earth before humans. Digging into the Hominid tree might add some qualifications, but I don't see that as a meaningful distinction.
The engine of Germany's wealth is blocking its future (europeancorrespondent.com)
•
> Having ideas is difficult and expensive. Let's lobby instead! > [..] spends around €10 million a year on lobbying – which sounds like a lot, but amounts to just 0.05% of VW's €21 billion R&D budget. > The logic is clear: innovation is expensive and uncertain, whereas lobbying to keep current products on the road is cheap and reliable. Complete non sequitur. This could more easily be read as "they don't care much about lobbying and are hard at work doing R&D instead", but then that would go very much against narrative the author is trying to spin for us here.
Germany could turn it around with laxer laws about permanent residency and new infrastructure. Allow people to live permanently in mobile homes, vans and caravans which they can rent to won from automobile makers, invest in campsites. The good future imo isn't megacities but distributed cities with families and social circles congregating.
•
Isn't it easier to fix housing issue and build more apartments?
About 40% of the uranium used in Germany came from Rosatom, either directly from Russia or from Kasachstan. That would have helped us to reduce co2, but not to get independent from Russia. Also: Natural gas is used heavily in chemistry and the steel industry, electricity alone does not help, although I admit not raising the point in the previous comment.
•
Germany could have sourced from Niger - who's entire uranium supply chain is owned by hook and by crook by France's Orano. > Natural gas is used heavily in chemistry and the steel industry Absolutely, and Germany could have defended it's ability to access NatGas from outside Russia or the MidEast if they collaborated like France's TotalEnergie and their Indian JV partners did when expanding capacity in Mozambique and Angola. --- The reality is German politicians are a reflection of the German people (as you guys are fond of telling us Americans). Germans would gladly choose vassalage instead of restarting and expanding conscription, investing in industrial subsidizes, and adopting a hard power foreign policy strategy. Merz only started these kinds of policies in mid-late 2025, and while it is a good start, it is too little too late. Germany used to have one of the most respected armed forces in NATO and was the linchpin of the Yugoslav Wars, but German voters decided to whittle away that legacy.
Copy the model of ASML. Build something really complicated that no one else can easily copy.
•
China is copying them though. They are still behind, but they are catching up.
•
> China is copying them though. They are still behind, but they are catching up. They have been "catching up" for the past 20 years.
> I've handed over my resignation for my FAANG job and am looking for a job in other countries as I don't see myself building a future here. You quit your job at a large US company because you do not see yourself building a future in Germany?
•
Not only, but also due to this. Relocation through switching teams is not possible. Compensation took a big hit due to dollar depreciation. Worst case I'll end up being on unemployment insurance for a year, ~ 2800 EUR per month while travelling the world in my late twenties... When property costs 1 million+ (the case in Berlin/Munich), financially it really doesn't matter whether I net 6500 EUR month working 50+ hours for FAANG or 4500 EUR working 35 hour weeks for a German corporate, even though the gross salary for the FAANG job is twice the German job.
> Another big problem is the mentality. "We have always done it this way" and "I don't want to change it" is extremely prevalent. I say this as a German. Interestingly it's not only the domain of the conservatives (e.g. CDU/CSU) to cut any discussion this way. Social democrats (and their voters) use the same argument, just in instances where it fits their program (e.g. labour laws). > I really don't see a solid economic future for Germany when enough other countries implement more progressive economic policies. The only party suggesting any such policies consistently fails to clear the 5% threshold as of late. Evidently, the electorate is satisfied with the status quo.
•
Yeah, I would call both CDU and SPD conservatives, SPD is just a left-conservative with a focus on labour rights. CDU is a bigger problem though, because their voter base is more loyal, and the only way their voters are going to migrate if CDU loses its grip is towards the far-right.
It's not as simple as 100% of this is on the car manufacturers. There's a lot at play, which in combination led to this "perfect" storm. Energy policies and hence ever increasing energy prices, bureaucracy almost as bad as Italy, governements making technical decisions for unprepared manufacturers by setting goals of EV production numbers and above all phasing out the cornerstone of the countries engine, literally: ICE power units. And yes, most management are of an era that truly doesn't understand the convergent challenges in a mixed market of ICE and EVs. Shortsighted decisions have been made, throwing out the baby with the bathwater - craftsmanship, vision and engineering prowess. What was an engineering driven industry with a say in where all this is headed became a soulless marketing machine, merely scratching the surface of what needs to be done. They created some very bad "sci-fi" by plastering screens everywhere in interiors while still treating software like some part you can outsource to the lowest bidding supplier, swapping these out every other model range or update. Actual internal research and guidance got killed off around the early 2010s by outsourcing all of it externally. Besides, the culture and politics within these corporations are the worst i ever encountered in my whole career. It's a very grim picture we're looking at but there's nobody, neither in upper management across boards nor in politics actually being able to see the misery they're in, let alone doing something about it. Glad i left almost 10 years ago but still sad, since all I had to witness is effecting society as a whole and not in a good way. It's really just the beginning of what is to come.
•
> It's not as simple as 100% of this is on the car manufacturers. Another big lobbyist is chemistry industry. They are very reliant on gas.
The fact that Angela Merkel closed down all nuclear power plants was probably a big part of the lower interest in EVs in recent year. Although they invested a lot in solar and wind, the solid base of electricity generation disappeared and thus the trust in electricity for transport disappeared amongst automotive management and the population at large.
•
Good luck modulating nuclear power plants when there is a lot of cheap renewable energy available.
"the solid base of electricity generation disappeared and thus the trust in electricity for transport disappeared" I'm sorry, but WTF? This is the most unhinged drivel about German nuclear I have ever read on HN, and that's saying something. There no problem with "trust in electricity", whatsoever, nor is there any lack of a "solid base". There has been no electricity grid collapse in Germany for decades(in stark contrast to the US, or f.e. Spain). Any problems with electrcity have been due to terrorism or building errors. Even with that, in case you haven't noticed, EV cars run on batteries and don't need constant power. Perhaps for "preppers" or people living in remote areas it would be a factor, but I have never in my life heard anyone connect the use of EV power with the power station the charging comes from or how reliable the grid is.
•
WTF about your understanding of the German power grid, I would say. Germany is not in a position to continuously meet its own electricity needs, but is dependent on daily aid deliveries of electricity from abroad. The electricity needs of industry cannot be met in a market-oriented manner, but taxpayers have to spend additional money so that industry can continue to produce at all. The absurdly high prices for electricity in Germany prevent any competitiveness. Ignoring all of this can only be described as WTF – what country do you actually live in?
•
What you call "aid from abroad" is generally called a functioning wide area synchronous grid ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_area_synchronous_grid ) which covers most of the EU plus some Balkan states, Moldova, Ukraine, Turkey and the northwestern corner of Africa. So Germany can sell power to others when renewables are generating more than it needs (which is often), and import power, not necessarily because it couldn't produce it, but because importing it can be cheaper than e.g. starting up an additional backup plant. This is nothing special and has been working reliably for decades.
•
Energy scientist in Germany here. Germany could fully supply it's national grid with German energy production. We just don't do it because it's cheaper to buy i.e. heavily subsidized nuclear power from France, or other sources. In the end, it's all markets across the whole EU - by design. Why should it not be, the European energy grid is interconnected for a reason.
[dead]
•
The original plan was to only shut the reactors down when enough renewable energy sources would be available to replace them. The Merkel government wanted to prolong the initially planned phase outs. Then Fukushima happened. Bad optics. So after pressure from the populace they instead of prolonging their runtime (as they wanted initially), they shut them down, but earlier than planned. Get the facts straight.
No where is safe from this kind of fuckery though. Greed is in human nature because education is gamified, sports are gamified, business is gamified, your attention is even gamified. You’re forced to run a race you never signed up for in a manner which you disagree with for an audience that gives nothing in return but laughs as they watch you spin the wheel for them. Literary aside, there used to be a time when you could count on a company and they could count on you. Now it’s a culture cult. This makes whistleblowing and doing what’s right virtually impossible. Who wants to sacrifice everything? Only the scorned and mistreated or it has to be egregious enough to solicit public outcry.
•
Shouldn't whistle-blowing be much easier in a more transactional work culture where everyone knows you can't count on the company and they'll fuck you over next Thursday on a whim of some consultant or an ambitious upper manager?
The Polish manufacturing miracle is really well known among people who study economics so it's funny that natural Polish people wouldn't be aware of it.
•
I explain this with our national pessimism and constant complaints about everything. We also compare ourselves to rest of Europe, where wages are still better and many things are cheaper.
This [1] is what really brought Germany's industry down, not the green non-sense spouted by articles like this one: > Gas prices rose to $70 per megawatt-hour in Germany — it makes it 6 times more expensive than in the US Germany was relatively fine, industrially speaking, while it still had a working relationship with Russia and especially with cheap Russian gas. It all went to the gutters when the Americans imposed their imperial will on them, on the Germans (see also the Nord Stream fuck-up), and it has been a steady downhill road for the Germans since then. To re-iterate, there's no German economic miracle that would allow them to be competitive against other indutrialised countries (such as the US) while they have to pay two or three times more for their energy inputs. [1] https://x.com/MyLordBebo/status/2031015804179791877
•
> Germany was relatively fine, industrially speaking, while it still had a working relationship with Russia and especially with cheap Russian gas. It all went to the gutters when the Americans imposed their imperial will on them, on the Germans (see also the Nord Stream fuck-up), and it has been a steady downhill road for the Germans since then. That's quite the reversal of facts. Germany cut off Russian gas after imperial Russia started a full invasion on Ukraine. That was Germany's decision and has little to do with the US. The US also did not force Russia to invade Ukraine and to targeted kill Ukrainian civilians for their decision to strive for freedom, democracy and prosperity rather than being a corrupt satellite state to Putin's terror. Energy prices undoubtedly skyrocketed after that, but that's just the immediate result of finally breaking with the politically engineered dependence on Russia. For decades Germany made itself reliant on Russian gas. What might have started as optimism after the cold war and the hope for good mutually beneficial relations with Russia turned into corruption and irresponsible ignorance and short term thinking at best. Energy prices in Germany are so high because the German government deliberately sabotaged the shift to renewables. German politics made Germany dependent on fossil fuels that you can burn exactly once and that Germany has to continuously, expensively dig out of the ground and keep importing because Germany lacks enough natural gas. Digging something out of the ground to burn it once is not economic when the alternative of harvesting the sun and wind that just keep on giving you energy indefinitely exists. But Germany decided to deliberately stall building grid technology and farms for harvesting free unlimited energy. Instead they turned to Russia to get gas for cheapish in the exchange for letting Putin live out his imperialist plans. Russia's aggression is not new. They invaded Georgia in 2008 and started the war against Ukraine in 2014. Germany started building the Nordstream 2 gas pipeline, which would have even furthered its dependence, in 2015, after all that. And they kept the plan when Russia backed Assad and commited war crimes against the Syrian people.
> US is built on these principles, And it's a complete clown show rewarding moral bankruptcy that ended up fabricating and promoting uneducated degenerates such as Trump, Hegseth, Miller, &co to the highest positions. Thanks for making my point really...
•
These are very different problems from what Germany has though. And it's a recent issue, while individualism is a core tenet of American culture since independence.
I'm Getting a Whiff of Iain Banks' Culture (probablydance.com)
•
I think the author is making a mistake assigning the seemingly new competence of the US military to AI, rather than noticing that the US has spent the last half-century or so picking the kinds of fights we absolutely suck at. Force projection, targeted aerial strikes, intelligence gathering, and a nuclear deterrent play to the US miltary's strengths. Convincing the people who we just whacked the leaders of to like us? Not at all. The US doesn't have the political will to commit the monstrous acts required to stomp out an insurgency, and we, as the big bad empire on the global stage, can't help but inspire insurgents. If you look at the boondoggles that the US has gotten itself into post Korea, they typically follow a pattern of "we show up, complete the key objectives in the first couple of days, and then spend years occupying territory while trying to root out an insurgency, creating new insurgents at least as fast as we neutralize them, then eventually limp away with our tail between our legs." Lately, we've been just doing the first part. Which is the part we've been good at for ages. No need to blame AI, it's just that we aren't / haven't gotten around to doing the part we suck at.
•
This feels somewhat ahistorical. The US has nearly always been successful in terms of conventional firepower and individual operations. E.g. in 2003 the US overthrew Saddam's government in a matter of weeks. The US won most battles in Vietnam. That doesn't change the fact that the strategic outcomes and long-term track record are poor. Trying to draw a link to AI or the current state of the US military feels flimsy. Anyway, the recurring Big Question throughout the Culture series is "how should a highly progressive, developed, and egalitarian society act when it meets others who are not ?". The US is sliding further and further from that ideal, and you can argue whether it was ever close.
•
We should be more specific about what’s surprising. The US being able to engage in a very one-sided air war is not surprising. The Gulf War went similarly well and so did the 2003 invasion of Iraq, at first. I think it’s surprising that attempting to capture or kill a foreign leader actually worked. But I’m not sure if US presidents other than Trump would have tried? Trump has a lot of “you can just do things” energy due to being largely unconstrained by legal or moral considerations, or larger strategic concerns. Israeli intelligence being able to so thoroughly hack the devices of their enemies clearly has a lot to do with this. What happened to Hezbollah was surprising.
•
I have had the same hypothesis around the recent operational success of US military interventions, but would agree with other comments here that this is more "vibes" than data. It's been reported that Maven (integrated with Claude) has been used extensively for Iran, but I haven't seen any hard evidence this is directly contributing to greater US military efficiency. I do buy the general thesis that AI would support operation excellence and solve attention problems across concurrent actions. Would be good to see some more reporting or combat analysis to try to measure the contributions of AI (e.g., how many more concurrent aerial sorties are taking place vs equivalent interventions, how many more strikes are "successful" vs past, etc). EDIT: I see this post has been flagged. Why? I understand it’s political but it seems very much within the site’s ethos. I didn’t get the impression it was AI-writing either.
•
Except the Culture are the good guys.
•
A Culture Mind would at least have a clear set of objectives and a plan for how to achieve them? "Bomb everything forever" doesn't seem very like the Culture at all?
•
"The Master Chief has gone rampant."
•
Uninformative title? I’m getting a whiff of AI cont— oh right there it is. Today it’s how AI is a superpower for the already by-far the most powerful military in the world. Okay sure why not. In the case of Maduro was that an amazing feat? Massacring the whole bodyguard entourage? Capturing a head of state who might have been a willing accomplice? How does this square with bombing civilian targets in Iran? Another superhuman stalker-micro move?
•
Or, the US military is just that good. I mean, we spend orders of magnitude more than our closest adversaries, let alone other smaller nations. It should be that good. No AI necessary. Maybe.
•
The prize for the most insane take on the Iran War has been awarded to this piece. Let's see how many days until something else tops it.
•
"The US has been acting powerful recently..." sure_jan.gif I can commiserate with this person cooking up a rant based on a faulty initial premise but it's a doozy. Kidnapping heads of state and indiscriminate bombing campaigns with massive collateral damage certainly don't fit my conception of "acting powerful."
•
not sure i'd lump Iran in with Venezuela here. also far too early for either to say if either will lead to a "win" whatever that means.
I understand the attempted analogy, but it's more like dealing with AIs that Ferengi have built than with one of the Minds of Culture.
•
The Ferengi may have funded it, but it was built by Binars...I hope.
"constantly put pressure on the human" In my experience this is the big difference with AI vs humans. It's not superhuman intelligence (although it does have a massive working memory) but rather the ability to just grind on anything you throw at it, long past the point when any reasonable human would have taken a break or given up. "It can kind of be be bargained with. It can kind of be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear but it will fake them! And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are absolutely right!"
•
Infinite patience is what I call it. It would be great for a tutor
I perhaps get where the author is coming from at a very surface level, but the US is acting like a drunk Culture where the Minds face credible accusations of all sorts of abuse, are named something like 'I Got Small Dick, Wannu Make Everyone Think Is Big', have no goal beyond self-enrichment and ships that dump their human passengers into empty space with the promise that if they somehow survive the next time they come onboard, everything is going to be even more BIG, GREAT and BEAUTIFUL! So not sure I buy the analogy.
•
The analogy is about technology aiding operational efficiency. It ends there. You basically made a dramatic statement about Trump.
> you just can’t play StarCraft that much better than the best humans I could not disagree with this more. Just the perfect micro part means that computers have a far higher ceiling than humans. No, it is not possible in theory for humans to have perfect micro with thousands of APM! We're talking about hundred unit zergling swarms perfectly dodging tank shells. Hundreds of APM at multiple locations on the map. Perfect timing and placement for every order. This is like saying an aimbot wouldn't make a top CS pro much better.
•
> We're talking about hundred unit zergling swarms perfectly dodging tank shells. Exactly the reference I was thinking of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKVFZ28ybQs
The key line "I’m getting a similar sense for the recent US foreign interventions and wars. They all seem to work slightly better than they should." There is no measurement of efficacy here. It feels like these things are working better because the US military is now doing big public things, but that is not necessarily a good change over not-doing-big-public-things.
•
Yeah, that was exactly where he lost me. The US military doesn't need a remarkable amount of luck for these operations to be tactical successes, tactical risk wasn't the reason previous administrations didn't do them. The element that was missing was a complete disregard for second order consequences, and Claude has nothing to do with that whatsoever.
Revealed: UK's multibillion AI drive is built on 'phantom investments' (theguardian.com)
•
> “mainline AI into the veins” of the British economy Wow, what a terrible, yet perhaps inadvertently accurate, metaphor.
•
The current government, like the last one, are just a front for funnelling income tax from the poor to the rich, and of course doing whatever the Epstein Regime wants them to do. But yeah, we need a power-hungry datacenter more than we need proper sewerage, proper water management investment, shorter hospital wait times, decent border patrol, or some of the fucking potholes fixed! Still, it makes a change to just giving the money to the NarcoFührer clown in Ukraine, I suppose.
It's such as shame to see the country that produced the Sinclair Spectrum and so many classic gaming legends become so irrelevant in computing and gaming..
•
Counter- (or at least more recent data-) point: Raspberry Pi, Arm.
•
It's OK, we're doing badly across the board, not just computing. :-(
•
More than just that, so much of early "computer science" has .uk addresses associated, they had some serious chops in early software development, too.
Oh crypto is doing fine, no issues there. NFTs however, like all the hype of pictures of monkeys selling for ridiculous amounts of money, that's the implosion I was referring to.
•
The "blockchain" collapse was covered up by the AI explosion, many of the NFT/blockchain things that would have died out pivoted to be AI (or AI on the blockchain!).
•
> many of the NFT/blockchain things that would have died out pivoted to be AI (or AI on the blockchain!). I'm guessing you're talking about smaller projects? AFAIK, neither Bitcoin nor Ethereum have anything to do with AI, and combined they're 1.5T USD in market cap, that's not propped up by AI, is it?
I don't disagree, but I can't join you wishing for it to happen. It's going to be bad for all of us.
•
The longer it's delayed, the worse it will be.
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
Ask HN: Can I repurpose a Bluetooth voice remote as input device for a PC?
•
It sounds like you want a dictation mic. Philips’s SpeechMike and OM System’s (formerly Olympus) RecMic are big in the healthcare space. My SpeechMike is wireless with a USB dongle and has something akin to a trackpoint for mouse movement, and buttons that can be programmed to send keystrokes. Dictation mics are not cheap, unfortunately, but you may be able to get used ones for much less.
Maybe some of the modern game controllers could fit, I know some of them have mic jacks but I don't know if any have built microphones. They fit the bill for handheld trackpad/etc with plenty of buttons at least.
•
The PS5 controller (DualSense) has a built in microphone and a trackpad.
Yes, but its gonna be weird. I've done very tangentially related work with game controllers, and my suspicion is you're gonna have to try a few (dozen?) before you find one that even sends reasonable commands. I can imagine a FireTV stick sending game controller inputs. I have no idea, but that's the type of thing that might go wrong. A MX3 air mouse might be the exact thing you want though.
•
> MX3 air mouse This, or similar, with a hot key for voice input, or a live activation word.
FreeBSD Capsicum vs. Linux Seccomp Process Sandboxing (vivianvoss.net)
I'd love to hear this explained. Deeply. The UI is fun but unreadable, but content is solid. Explain how this is slop please.
•
It's pretty obvious. Lots of LLM signs. Short sentences that keep repeating the same idea. It's not x, it's this. In fact, the entire blog seems to be LLM-generated.
A problem with that approach is that libc can after an upgrade decide to start doing syscalls you were not expecting. Like the first time you call `printf()` it calls `newfstatat()`. Only the first time. Maybe in the future it'll call it more often than that, and then your binary breaks. I'm not sure what glibc's latest policy is on linking statically, but at least it used to be basically unsupported and bugs about it were ignored. But even if supported, you can't know if it under some configurations or runtime circumstances uses dlopen for something. Or maybe once you juggle more than X file descriptors some code switches from using `poll()` to using `select()` (or `epoll()`). My thoughts last time I looked at seccomp: https://blog.habets.se/2022/03/seccomp-unsafe-at-any-speed.html
•
[delayed]
Now that Landlock actually is a thing, have you considered writing another followup? Given what I've seen of landlock, I expect it'll be spicy...
•
I've actually found it pretty fine. It doesn't have full coverage, but they have a system of adding coverage (ABI versions), and it covers a lot of the important stuff. The one restriction I'm not sure about is that you can't say "~/ except ~/.gnupg". You have to actually enumerate everything you do want to allow. But maybe that's for the best. Both because it mandates rules not becoming too complex to reason about, and because that's a weird requirement in general. Like did you really mean to give access to ~/.gnupg.backup/? Probably not. Probably best to enumerate the allowlist. And if you really want to, I guess you can listdir() and compose the exhaustive list manually, after subtracting the "except X". I find seccomp unusable and not fit for purpose, but landlock closes many doors. Maybe you know better? I'd love to hear your take.
Reverse-engineering the UniFi inform protocol (tamarack.cloud)
Nice trick. Just a heads up that I had to whitelist your domain as NextDNS blocked it for being newly registered. Given this thread will probably attract other Unifi users... has anyone had success migrating from MongoDB to something like FerretDB? I played around with getting this to work a few weeks ago and found that day-to-day it works without issue, but restoring a backup will error since it relies on some unsupported Mongo semantics (renaming collections iirc).
•
How are you performing backup of FerratDB? Are you using MongoDB tools, or are you using PostgreSQL-specific tools?
If you want to bypass Unifi Protect, what sort of "adoption" are you thinking of? AFAIK, "adoption" is a Unifi Protect thing. Otherwise it's just a device on your network that you can configure Frigate etc. to connect to and pull streams.
•
Changing the credentials for web access (firmware upgrade, janky jpeg-based live stream, etc.) and ssh access from the default ubnt:ubnt. Surprisingly, I don't see a page for this in the web UI, and the `password` command in the CLI is ineffective. I haven't looked around the filesystem. Setting where it sends the video stream. Configuring video settings, zone detections, etc. I found a video going through them here: < https://youtu.be/URam5XSFzuM?si=8WK4Yghh9kidZe6c&t=279 > Just about any other camera lets you change this stuff through the camera's built-in web interface and/or ONVIF. Ubiquitis apparently don't. > Otherwise it's just a device on your network that you can configure Frigate etc. to connect to and pull streams. No, it connects to you!
•
You want to change the credentials of the camera, so Frigate can log into it while it is connected to your Unifi network? I did that for 5 different cameras yesterday, you're saying Unifi's cameras doesn't allow user management? That sucks! > No, it connects to you! I thought frigate connects to the camera's RTSP stream (maybe with ONVIF in the mix)?
•
> I thought frigate connects to the camera's RTSP stream (maybe with ONVIF in the mix)? Right, that's the expectation of Frigate, my own Moonfire NVR, and basically every other NVR out there. Ubiquiti decided to think different.
•
Well thanks for the heads-up to avoid their cameras.
No leap second will be introduced at the end of June 2026 (lists.iana.org)
•
How about a leap minute instead so we only have to worry about this when it's not a problem anymore :)? We will either hit the fermi filter or accend intelligence.
Leap Seconds need to be abolished. The only people who need it are Astronomers. They could just use an offset. Implementing leap seconds correctly is a huge burden, for no gain. Where I live, high noon today occurs at 1:03 PM. No one is complaining that it is 3 minutes (or 63 minutes) off. It's a non-issue for 99.9% of the population.
•
> The only people who need it are Astronomers. And anyone that cares about the relationship of the time of day and the position of the Sun. Granted, it's not a lot, only a minute per century.
Hmm. I understand that perspective, but I'm not sure I agree. It does seem to matter over a relatively short & realistic time scale. According to the Wikipedia page, there have been 27 seconds added since 1972, which is only 44 years ago. At that rate, that's about 1 minute per 100 years. We have many systems that have existed for several centuries and I think it's not unreasonable to start making plans for systems that may exist for millennia, where you're starting to talk about a 10+ minute offset at the current rate. But I do think there is a valid argument that the infrequency of these events cause more issues than maybe one large adjustment 500 years from now would cause. Not sure where I land on this one.
•
The problem is that Earth's rotation isn't consistently faster. Some years leap seconds need to be added, some years they need to be removed. Would be far better to leave them alone, let them average out, and as the GP said let the people who care about this add the offset they need.
Show HN: VS Code Agent Kanban: Task Management for the AI-Assisted Developer (appsoftware.com)
•
Sorry for the slightly unrelated comment, but the amount of AI written slop comments here is so high. Was this caused by mentioning "AI" in the title?
•
“Context rot” with AI coding tools is definitely real. After a few sessions the agent forgets earlier decisions, and you end up repeating the same planning conversation again. Storing the plan and discussion as Markdown in Git is an interesting approach. It basically treats the agent’s reasoning as part of the project history, not just the final code. Curious if others here are doing something similar to keep context across sessions.
•
I'd been using this workflow for a while, but this post I found on HN a couple of weeks ago really solidified it: https://boristane.com/blog/how-i-use-claude-code/ > The workflow I’m going to describe has one core principle: never let Claude write code until you’ve reviewed and approved a written plan. This separation of planning and execution is the single most important thing I do. It prevents wasted effort, keeps me in control of architecture decisions, and produces significantly better results with minimal token usage than jumping straight to code.
•
Manus workflow uses three file approach via deliverables.md, taskplan.md, and notes.md. I use this combined with VSDD with my agents.
•
sure will take a look
Ireland shuts last coal plant, becomes 15th coal-free country in Europe (2025) (pv-magazine.com)
•
A lot of these plants were built in the 70s-90s and were expected to run 40–50 years. Instead many are shutting early because renewables plus carbon pricing have simply made them uneconomical
•
Just last week they were talking about the future of Irelands energy generation, and the pressure between now and 2028 from data centers and EVs. Reopening moneypoint as a backup has been discussed. It's been kept as a oil fired backup station, but given the current surge in oil prices I could see it turning to coal again. I really hope they just turn heavily toward renewables. We have enough offshore wind in Ireland to power most of the world, if we could just build enough turbines and harness it. We could become a net exporter of green power
China has 1200 of them, no doubt they will follow Ireland's noble lead
•
Well, > The new analysis for Carbon Brief shows that electricity generation from coal in India fell by 3.0% year-on-year (46 terawatt hours, TWh) and in China by 1.6% (90TWh). https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-coal-power-drops-in-china-and-india-for-first-time-in-52-years-after-clean-energy-records/
•
Seem to be on their way. Solar power is cheaper than coal now for some projects. In 10 years coal will be entirely obsolete. Though of course phase out will take longer
Was Ireland's air particularly polluted?
•
I think they meant China
The point isn't about Ireland specifically so don't get hung up on that. It's a general shift away from coal.
•
So are China, generally shifting away from coal?
•
yes: https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/china-plans-cut-carbon-dioxide-emissions-per-unit-gdp-by-around-38-2026-2026-03-05/ do you have any other questions?
I think this is very strategically stupid decision (or crime committed by high management). Those should be preserved and be ready for use in case things go south which is not inconceivable judging by what is happening around Am am not against "saving planet" etc. Just make sure you still have a way to survive if high tech fails. Same as with let's abolish all cash without thinking what a nightmare it can / will cause one day
•
From the article: the Moneypoint plant will continue to serve a limited backup role, burning heavy fuel oil under emergency instruction from Ireland’s transmission system operator EirGrid until 2029.
They might want to reopen it, oil prices spiked to $120 a few hours ago.
•
ironically it's been converted to run on Oil now, as a backup
Dirty power generation, and dirty toxic hazardous industry in general, discriminate against the poor and minorities. That carries an enormous social cost that goes uncounted in discussions like the ones on this thread. Nuclear discriminates against capitalism. The cost makes the choice of nuclear irrational. The inability to insure nuclear in the private market makes it a travesty of free markets.
•
The top comment currently on this post is talking about the cost impacts being transferred to the poor and middle class with lots of discussion. I think people are well aware of and discuss the social impacts.
Unclear to me why you've been downvoted here. The data clearly shows that China is taking more serious action on this issue than any other developed or developing economy.
•
It's pretty clear to me. China and India are convenient boogeymen for climate change deniers and fossil fuel shills.
Irish man here - Over the last few years, we've graduated from providing cheap energy to now importing most of our energy. We've seen huge energy price increases as a result. We're seeing more and more cost-of-living protests, the war now means more will suffer with fuel prices and we're still going ahead with closing down energy suppliers (this is a 2025 article but the point still stands). To anyone praising these stupid, politically incentivised initiatives - congratulations to us on making the poor and middle-classes poorer. But it's all good - we're saving the world I guess. The poor folks can sort themselves out.
•
Even if you ignore the climate impact, fossil fuels pollution causes millions of premature deaths a year, and unlike with global warming, that effect is localized. That alone should be reason to transition off of fossil fuels, especially coal which is the dirtiest.
•
ChatGPT : "tell me about China use of coal energy" "China is by far the largest consumer and producer of coal in the world. Coal has historically been the backbone of China’s rapid industrialization and still plays a dominant role in its energy system." - ~55–60% of China’s electricity comes from coal (varies slightly year to year). - China consumes more coal than the rest of the world combined. - Annual consumption: roughly 4–4.5 billion tons per year. - China produces about 50% of global coal output The west suffers while China does whatever it wants, at a Grand Scale.
•
Yes, China consumes a lot of coal. But they are trying to consume less. You cannot ask a developing country to go back on its merging into the first world by consuming less energy or investing in more expensive sources only. We westerners are here because we grew on cheap and dirty energy, what moral ground do we have to ask them to stop growing? Coal was almost 100% of China energy consumption only 15 years ago, with a bit of hydro. Today they are very aggressively shifting towards anything but coal, as you found in ChatGPT, to less than 60% of coal in the mix. For comparison, the US is almost at the same point today than 15 years ago, only significantly replaced coal with more gas. A country that is consuming about the same amount of energy since 2000, while China consumes 5x.
•
Can't blame GPT I guess it wasn't trained that recently but China is now taking steps to rectify that. https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/china-plans-cut-carbon-dioxide-emissions-per-unit-gdp-by-around-38-2026-2026-03-05/
•
So glad you're taking the hit for the rest of us. Your sacrifice is totally worth the .001% difference you make, every little bit counts. Why is it people can clearly see the recycling scam for what it was, but the idea of coal or carbon fuels makes them entirely unable to handle any sort of thinking that isn't entirely superficial and one-sided? Maybe, like everything else in life, it's a complex series of tradeoffs, costs, and benefits, and you decide whether the cost is worth the benefit. And if a policy being pushed doesn't make sense when all the costs and benefits are accounted for, then someone is doing something shady and making a shit ton of money, especially if there's a huge amount of smoke and mirrors and politicized talk. Ireland's being used for things and it's obvious those in power don't care about and don't think the Irish people being affected by these sorts of policies can or will do anything about it. As that largely seems to be the case, I have to wonder if we're going to see a repeat of what seems to happen every time a government thinks that about the Irish and takes advantage of them.
•
Cheap energy from coal is very expensive energy. Who’s going to clean up the pollution? Carbon capture uses a lot of energy
Ireland's population has still not exceeded its high point before the potato famine and the mass export of the population.
•
Importing infinity Africans is not the restoration of the Irish population.
"for the record", reddit energy It's suicidal for the Irish, not suicidal for the Ireland Economic Zone. There's a difference.
•
You did not provide any fact supporting the 'suicidality' of anything, or even any definition of 'suicidality'. Also narrowly defined ethnicities are not humans, they cannot commit suicide.
> The actual causes of electricity cost rises in Ireland being higher than Europe are Wrong comparison. Most of Europe has way too high electricity prices. It seems logical that ending the use of existing coal energy infrastructure puts upward pressure on prices. Coal is cheap, abundant, energy dense. Yes, burning coal causes lots of problems and I support ending it's use, but this is besides the point.
•
> Coal is cheap Only if you ignore all externalities including: - environmental damage from mining (yes this exists for renewables too) - global warming - pollution on city infrastructure - pollution on health - the sunk costs causing higher transition costs when inevitably you transfer to renewables anyways.
•
> Only if you ignore all externalities Do not discount how easy that is to do. Your list is of costs not to any bottom line of a company with bean counters. Those external costs are out side the scope of their concerns. Your list of concerns would be something for C-suite types, but the pressure of stock prices again make the external costs easy to set aside.
•
Sure, but as a consumer you can also care about these things.
> Coal is cheap, abundant, energy dense. Nuclear defeats coal in all of these aspects, aside from the high upfront cost.
•
Upfront costs... then running costs (in the UK at least, it has to command a premium over other energy prices, to be profitable)... afterwards costs (in the UK no private company is on the hook for decommissioning their nuclear plants, the population will pick up that cost through taxes)... But sure, nuclear is cheap if you ignore all those things.
> Coal is cheap, abundant, energy dense. Coal is neither cheap nor abundant in Ireland.
•
This. Fossil fuels are not cheap in Ireland, I think we only produce a small quantity of natural gas, everything else is imported. Ireland should be running towards renewables, we have no indigenous fossil fuels industry to lose and every watt we generate from renewables is money that stays in Ireland. We should be focused on reducing nimbyism and building out renewables.
•
Coal also isn’t really energy dense since so much of the energy is wasted when converting to electricity
> Most Europe has way too high electricity prices. Way to high compared to what? Some countries do not even have a problem with prices but with capacity (Netherlands). They would be willing to pay but they do not have the grid to deliver where the thing is needed, and it's hard to build new grids in high density areas. > It seems logical that ending the use of existing coal energy infrastructure lead to an increase of prises. But doesn't this depend a lot on planning and investing in alternatives rather the just closing or not the coal? Sure, if you just close one source and leave everything else untouched prices will increase, but doesn't sound like the smartest approach overall...
•
Way to high compared to actual cost. Almost half of fuel and electricity costs in Germany is tax.
> Ultimately though, the only way to fix this is to build a lot of wind (industrial scale) and solar (residential scale) as otherwise we're at the mercy of world events. I'd add that this is only part of the equation because: what do you do on an overcast day with no wind? You need significant storage capacity before you can become isolated from world events. Until then, you need power generation that you can bring online on short notice: coal, gas, hydro, etc. Traditionally, gas was used for this because it's easy to store, quick to get going and gas plants can also burn coal if needed. Unfortunately, the nice properties of gas (easy to store and transport) mean that it's a global commodity. It will go where they pay the most, which means that far away events can cause a price in gas prices globally.
•
> I'd add that this is only part of the equation because: what do you do on an overcast day with no wind? Battery technology is really, really getting there. And in the absence of any more improvements here (unlikely) you integrate your grids with other countries. That's harder for Ireland, but it's still worth doing.
An LNG terminal wouldn't help with cost (it would probably increase it a bit, if anything, as the cost of building it would have to be paid back). It's desirable from an energy _security_ perspective; as it is we are very dependent on a pipeline to Britain.
•
Yeah, even though I voted (happily) for the Greens, I was very disappointed in them not building an LNG terminal, purely for energy security reasons. I'd be super happy if it never got used, but it's a cost worth paying just in case.
Actually it should help with both, because a on-island terminal would also provide LNG storage capacity which would buffer short-term price fluctuations. We have zero such storage. Again, our poor decision making around national infrastructure is on our governments. They left have left us completely exposed to international markets.
•
A lot of it relates to the planning process, they do keep trying to build things. One could argue that this is also their fault (and I do!) but there are good historical reasons (cough ray burke cough michael lowry) why we've ended up with such a bureaucratic, byzantine planning process.
Recent data on import depdency from a link someone posted: > Ireland's energy import dependency was 79.6% in 2024, up from 78.3% in 2023 (for comparison, the EU average for 2023 was 58.3%). > Ireland imported 100% of its oil, 79.5% of its gas, and 14.0% of its electricity in 2024.
•
Yup, things kinda suck because of our complete failure to get our fingers out here. Again, people keep trying to build better stuff, but the planning process and our very decentralised democratic processes don't. help.
This attitude is ill informed. Ireland is richer than it has ever been. Poverty and housing difficulties have nothing to do with reducing emissions. Ireland partly got rich by being a massive CO2 polluter per capita. Now we are rich it’s only fair we lead in transitioning to renewables. Renewables are cheaper now than most forms of energy production. Grids need investment. I despair at these short sighted and fairly wrong on the facts views.
•
„Ireland“ is rich because companies have their office there. „The Irish“ are not rich. Talk about ill informed.
> Ireland partly got rich by being a massive CO2 polluter per capita. Now we are rich it’s only fair we lead in transitioning to renewables. Renewables are cheaper now than most forms of energy production. Grids need investment. Sorry, what? While I agree with you about reducing emissions, most of our transition from poor to rich(er) was driven by capital light businesses. To be fair, the pharma companies did come here because we refused to regulate spillovers up to EU standards, but that's less than half of the story. tl;dr loads of golf courses, english speaking population, smart industrial plannng and tax dodging was really how it happened.
•
None of those things were possible without the fossil fuel based energy underlying everything. Every single wealthy country used energy from fossil fuels to escape poverty. Some to a greater degree than others but that’s the basic reality. Now we have a way out of fossil fuels and we must take it or things will get even worse than they are already going to get anyway.
if solar and wind is subsidized by europe or usa, selling solar and wind to them is great. taxpayer money goes east, everybody is happy, meanwhile china is constructing more coal plants than all the other countries combined https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/number-of-coal-power-plants-by-country
•
Yes the share of electricity produced by coal plants is going down: https://ember-energy.org/countries-and-regions/china/ So it appears they’re building more renewable capacity than coal capacity.
India has bigger population than China. India is building 41 coal plant, China is building 289. India approved 5 more plants, China approved 405. China is building more coal power than all other countries combined including India . This thread is crazy. guys just look at numbers first...
•
Do have a look at the the numbers: https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-coal-power-drops-in-china-and-india-for-first-time-in-52-years-after-clean-energy-records/
Probably but damage from nuclear accidents isn't only measured in deaths. No coal plant accident has caused an exclusion zone for 40 years.
•
Only because the damage is more diffuse. Have you ever seen the common medical advice that pregnant women should avoid eating more than a few servings of seafood every week, and avoid certain kinds entirely, because they’re all contaminated with mercury? A huge portion of that mercury comes from burning coal. How’s that for an exclusion zone?
•
Or for a big long list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Superfund_sites
And turning it would cut your fingers to shreds! But it was great if the weather was fine.
•
Which it almost never was :/
You're mistaken. Onshore wind in England was de-facto but not de-jure banned by the Tories in 2018, due to a footnote inserted in their National Planning Policy Framework. Labour removed this footnote in 2024, immediately after winning the election. [0] Offshore wind was never affected, nor onshore wind in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. [0] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/policy-statement-on-onshore-wind/policy-statement-on-onshore-wind
•
Thanks, I was quite mistaken indeed! I wonder how much onshore England then affected the big picture.
The 'sell electricity to Ireland' bit here is doing an awful lot of work. It's more complicated than that. For those who don't know, Ireland operates an all-island grid, and EirGrid (the grid operator for the Republic) owns SONI (the grid operator for Northern Ireland). That means that 'UK' and 'Ireland' in this has a large Northern Ireland shaped lump of ambiguity that statement.
•
It shouldn't be that complicated. The UK sells electricity to Ireland (and vice-versa?) in the same way that Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Denmark and Norway sell electricity to the UK, and vice-versa. Don't tell me EirGrid's EWIC that comes onshore at Dublin and Greenlink at County Wexford are an "NI-shaped lump". They are sources of electricity for the whole island, when it's needed, just like the UK's interconnects with the continent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_high-voltage_transmission_links_in_the_United_Kingdom
Got it, thanks. So, not for grid electricity, as in this discussion.
•
Still, in the second figure of your link, you can see how gas is more or less stable since the start in 2005, and coal + peat is being slowly replaced almost 1:1 by renewables, mainly wind as hydro is stable and solar is marginal in Ireland.
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
Segagaga Has Been Translated into English (thedreamcastjunkyard.co.uk)
Amazing technical achievement, and also a very unfortunate situation with the reliance on AI translation. I'm not privy to the details of the actual translation process (whether AI translation was really just a technical placeholder or actually the draft for the real translation), but the criticism online has been scathing.
•
Yes the real achievement here I think is the creation and public sharing of the translation tools. The AI translation here should be considered effectively a proof of concept of the tools. Given the particular nature of this game, so reliant on inside jokes requiring a knowledge of SEGA history, it's likely an AI translation could miss a lot, and I think the community will eagerly await further real translations done by professional translators leveraging these tools.
The reason the PS2 was successful it was because it was very easy to unblock it and use pirated games. The Dreamcast wasn't as easy as I can remember.
•
I think that it was a game player and a DVD player had more to do with the success of the thing. Oh and it plays psx games too. I owned both. The graphics/games were of similar quality. Having a larger game storage gave the ps2 a decent advantage. The dreamcast seemed more interesting. But the PS2 had a better customer feature set.
Based on what I read in the article, MT was used as an experiment and proof of concept, and dedicated translation was done for the full release. Was that not the case? Was the workflow MT -> human translation? If so thats honestly such a lazy followthru given the technical hurdles overcome wrt the font tech
•
From the Github repo ( https://github.com/ExxistanceDC/Segagaga-English-Translation ), the translation went through a process called MTPE (Machine translation, post-editing). This works just like it sounds. The initial translation is done with machine translation, then human translators review and edit the resulting translation to try to correct any mistakes. > What I call the “playtesting translation” — a base translation that allowed the artists and playtesters to get started early and understand what they were working on — was developed using a combination of DeepL and ChatGPT 4o/4.5. That translation then went through a substantial, months-long human translator review. I don't think that the end product feels “machine-translated,” but that’s ultimately for you, the player, to judge.
•
Oh boo hoo. Just boooooo. Disappointed. Gif As a side bar, I found it funny how in a Stanford lecture teaching various routes to training llms on the Machine Translation benchmark, the sample used was a French to English translation of 'the teddy bear is blue' or something similar. After the lecture I reviewed the current production grade google translate...it butchered the translation I wouldnt trust machine translation.
•
> MTPE (Machine translation, post-editing). This works just like it sounds. The initial translation is done with machine translation, then human translators review and edit the resulting translation to try to correct any mistakes. And the consensus among professional translators is that MTPE only saves time if you're willing to accept a rushed and half-assed result. For them to actually ensure the MT didn't miss any nuance takes just as much effort as doing the whole process manually.
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
The Window Chrome of Our Discontent (pxlnv.com)
•
“Perhaps Apple has some user studies that suggest otherwise“ I can guarantee you they have done no such research. This redesign is a clear top-down imposition to make the visual language uniform and match some lead designer’s specs, not to actually make anything more useful or usable.
The "content over chrome" trend was started by Microsoft's Metro design language. Windows 8 and Metro are one of the biggest UI/UX disasters since the dawn of computing. Why would Apple keep copying the worst ideas from Microsoft? NNGroup has written about this trend: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/content-chrome-ratio/
•
> Why would Apple keep copying the worst ideas from Microsoft? Remember also the "Get a Mac" ads that parodied Windows Vista permission dialogs, but now macOS is a permission dialog hell. Tim Cook was an IBMer. I'm sure that Cook was a fine hire as an operations manager, but I doubt that Steve Jobs intended for someone like Cook to be in charge of everything at Apple, including UI design. (Jobs never put Jony Ive in charge of software, by the way, whereas Cook did.) Indeed, I doubt that Jobs groomed anyone to be his successor. By the time Jobs learned he had a fatal illness, it was too late, and he had to turn over the company to someone the board of directors would accept, which was Cook. Jobs was CEO but didn't own the company; infamously, the Apple board of directors chose John Sculley over Jobs in an earlier power struggle.
Metro worked perfectly well on tablets. And every OS since W8 has actually kept some version of Metro (in the form of e.g. larger touch-targets), because having a single version of Windows UI for both touchscreen and mouse-and-keyboard computers, is what enabled the creation of the "2-in-1" or "convertible" touchscreen notebook, a design that basically every modern Windows notebook instantiates. Liquid Glass also makes more sense on tablets. I think Apple is copying Microsoft because Apple is also moving toward full UI-level unification between their desktop mouse-and-keyboard UI and their mobile/tablet touchscreen UI. They've already done it for some apps (e.g. Notes.)
•
The Windows 8 equivalent server edition also included the upgrade to Metro UI. I don't know, I guess MS figured IT wanted to provision Windows services using a surface tablet? I actually really did like Windows Phones though. I can imagine a world with a third competitor in that space today... But MS didn't seem to have any understanding or ability to develop an ecosystem that works. Even when they were literally paying people to write apps for their app store, it was just terrible.
It's the year of the Linux desktop. Break free of the walled gardens, there's no good excuse to throw your money away anymore. ElementaryOS and a few other projects have superb Apple flavored UI and UX. Apple just wants your money; they don't give a flying rat's ass about you or your needs. Let liquid glass be your red pill - come join us in the real.
•
This year I switched from the Linux desktop to MacOS. I finally got tired of how unprofessional Linux operating systems were being run. I think Liquid Glass looks good.
•
Linux doesn't even register as a macOS competitor in my mind because of the lack of things like Objective-C and XPC. Sure, you could say there's Python and Dbus for that, but... no .
Not everyone uses Electron apps exclusively. The cross platform scene is much different these days. Electron apps suck, but at least they suck equally across all platforms. And there are many Electron apps. But a lot of people rely on Adobe, Microsoft or Windows-only, Mac-only apps. I don’t see that changing anytime soon, unfortunately.
•
Breaking free is easier than ever. You don't need walled gardens. AI is making handling the edge cases that kept people locked in almost trivial. Any workflow, custom spreadsheet, specific OS-only app can be worked around, easily. Staying stuck on Apple or Microsoft is a choice - they're no longer returning value concurrent with the money they charge. You're free to continue giving them money, but the reasons to do so make less and less sense each day that goes by.
I really want something between Sequoia and Tahoe. (Probably mostly Sequoia, but with targeted applications of Liquid Glass.) I don't like how Tahoe treats everything as floating on top, as if properly dividing windows into sidebars and panels is wrong... There's so much extra padding and rounding now, I hate it. Everything's lost the depth, detail and cleanliness it used to have, replaced by this bubbly mess. Like, sheets don't even slide out anymore, they overlay like on iOS. The charm, expressivity, and, well, Mac-ness is gone. I love Liquid Glass - the blur and refractive effects are so pretty and technically impressive - but it should be used tastefully instead of this nonsense. I feel like Tahoe in general is straying way, way too far from the battle-tested Cocoa foundation and into this total top-down crap. Liquid Glass feels like some sort of shareholder-enforced enshittification. macOS is supposed to be defined from the bottom up; it always has been. There has always been importance in having a solid base; a robust foundation for developers to build on. HIG, Cocoa, CoreGraphics, all of that is in service of this. The user experience and vertical integration is a result of this and couldn't exist without it. There's so much wrong with Tahoe that goes against everything Mac has ever been. We don't want to dumb down the interface; that has never been the goal. The goal has always been to make the interface intuitive enough that anyone can learn it. macOS and iOS are fundamentally different platforms with fundamentally different design constraints and considerations. Icons being able to escape the squircle was supposed to be a reflection of the fact that apps on Mac are less contained than apps on iOS. They have more expressive power and more advanced capabilities. You're working closer to the metal and in a less controlled environment. Because of that, you can do more and you're not constrained to the flows of the system. iOS always hasn't been this. The constraints of touch are different than the constraints of the desktop. Steve Jobs spoke about this a lot back in his day, about why iOS is so much more locked-down than Mac. But Mac has always been a platform for freedom and control. And Tahoe strips the soul of that.
•
"shareholder-enforced enshittification" what on earth could this possibly mean?
Fontcrafter: Turn Your Handwriting into a Real Font (arcade.pirillo.com)
•
Worked good for me scanning with the Google drive app and "enhancing" the scan. Typing out my own handwriting is a really neat experience!
Personally, I like that my handwriting has tiny inconsistencies in every character and rarely-repeated flourishes. I don't want to manufacture something that looks like it, but loses the soul of it.
•
I used something like this tool to create 10 different fonts of my handwriting. Then I wrote scripts to randomize which font was used for each character, ensuring that no word had that same variant of a single letter. It worked incredibly well for a personalized printed mail campaign. It really did look hand written. edit: basically what DANmode replied to the same parent. I did this 10 years ago while running for political office.
Tangentially related: anyone has suggestions on an "automated" way to "print" pages with a typewriter? If you want to have papers that "look" as typed with a typewriter, as opposed to printed with laser printers and such.
•
If you also want a thing to do typewriting on, later-model word processors (e.g., Smith Corona PWP series) tend to have a feature that auto-types text entered and edited earlier. It'll have the imprinting insofar as the type impacts the paper, but it's not going to have the off-center / over-inked / patchy manual typewriter look. For that you may just want to find a font face that replicates it.
I remember there was a service that would do this by mail in the 90s. You had to fill out a card with each block letter and then it cost a few hundred dollars. I wasn't even a teenager then so I couldn't afford it, but I always wanted to do it.
•
Well now I’m curious how they did it in the 90s. Some poor schmo doing pixel by pixel font creation?
Awesome! For anyone that think doctors' handwriting is unintelligible, wait till I give that thing a spin
•
My 3rd grade teacher wrote something like this regarding my handwriting in my final report card: We've done all we can for toast0. But he'll have a secretary so it'll be fine Thanks to COVID learning losses, I do manage to have a lot better penmanship than about half of kids going into high school this year. :)
Chris Pirillo. That's a name I haven't heard in a long time.. a long time .
•
OMG Yes! Dating ourselves aren't we? Pirillo, Laporte, Dvorak - awesome folks from Tech TV
Ah, the Overleaf model. Am I crazy to think there should be some way to stop this? It's utterly anticompetitive, but ai don't know any country where they bother trying to stop a small company buying/killing its competitors.
•
The competition to Overleaf is just running LaTeX locally, which costs approximately zero dollars and it's faster! But it's a little less convenient for a solo author, and a lot less convenient for a collaboration.
 Top