Unlurker

The recently proposed o(n log n) integer multiplication algorithm [pdf] (web.maths.unsw.edu.au)

> The new result does not directly imply new complexity bounds for polynomial multiplication over a fixed finite field, say multiplication in F2[x]. The state of the art for this problem is an algorithm that multiplies polynomials of degree n in time O(n log n 4^log*(n)) [HvdH19]. @platypii and I obtained a Lean proof of the same improvement for DFT over prime-order finite fields (yielding polynomial multiplication via the convolution theorem): https://github.com/platypii/integer-mult-bounds-lean/blob/master/docs/dft/dft.pdf

Note in this case the title says "O(n log n)", but the important part is this is "o(n log n)", not just "O(n log n)'. The former is a strict subset of the latter. We already knew how to multiply two n-bit integers in O(n log n) time, via the FFT.

ty, fixed. (ahh, copy paste.)

For those of us uninformed, what’s the difference between O and o?

f(n) = O(g(n)) means as n increases, f(n)/g(n) must not grow beyond a constant f(n) = o(g(n)) means as n increases, f(n)/g(n) must shrink

Both are upper bounds. But small o is strictly smaller than upper bound. Big O is not greater than upper bound. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1364444/difference-between-big-o-and-little-o-notation

If f is O(g) and o(h) then Lim f/g -> C a constant And Lim f/h -> 0

Lmao! If someone is asking the difference between big and little o notation this is absolutely not the right way to clarify it. If you were joking then maybe you got me

Big O basically drops constants O(2n+1) = O(2n) = O(n) o(2n+1) > o(2n) > o(n) Both define upper boundary, but big O can read like "the function is generally proportional to ___" and little o can read like "the function is never more than _____"

LLM Agents Play Pokemon Showdown (olivergrabner.com)

Pokémon Showdown isn't a game so much as it is competitive Wiki reading.

Not going to lie I agree lol but still interesting to see

what was the selection for the teams? random per round? how does it play against people in ladder?

Jev will give better results on this kind of thing.

Yeah Jev can play it but Jev cant communicate with its teammate in the 2v2 + it cant reason and is just a decision model

For sure are many better models for this use case[0] At the same time, it’s interesting seeing how generally capable language models/LLMs/agents/harnesses are getting We’ll probably see a lot more experiments and benchmarks like these in the near future 0: simple classifiers can play quite a few game, including Doom https://playground.jeffyclassify.com/#doom

mitmproxy adds --emudhra option (github.com/mitmproxy)

the "security" in those certificates where so trivial, that almost looks like on purpose as backdoor... which brings me to my next question, what if you rerun the same process for all the certificates in the "approved" stores, give them 1 min per certificate.. just to see how many other CAs are being "friendly" to parties that could take benefit of that... update... I'm talking out of ignorance here... but assuming cli open source tools, should they prevent you creating certificates with weak settings unless --emudhra-level-security is passed? also, what amount of time is needed in say a "civilian" gpu with claude to vibe code something that can test a certificate so say 80 bits.. or whatever is the level where yes, you cannot find the values to generate the certificate with a cpu... but you can with a gpu in say 1 day? say it's 80 bits... how many CA stores are there? how much does it cost to rent gpus to run in parallel to test 1 day of civilian gpu to check each certificate if you use one of these very expensive ones?

> what amount of time is needed in say a "civilian" gpu Per AI, 10²¹ years Alternatively I would presume you could do it in 1 year with 10²¹ GPUs.

Why would you need to insert a "backdoor" in a cert in the form of a crappy key, when you could just use a real key and provide it to whatever shady organization requested the backdoor in the first place?

It would’ve almost been better if the eight keys were just 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

That's the combination to my HSM!

military grade SSL

Seed is '123456', much more random than '4'

Airbnb bans making guests do dishes and take out the trash (theverge.com)

I'm certain that I've stayed in an AirBnB or two that had a rule book and chores, but I never read them. I'm a fairly tidy person and generally clean as I go, but I don't go out of my way to clean dishes or take out the trash unless it really needs it. I also don't leave reviews of places I stay, nor do I read the reviews left for me.

I’d rather use Booking because I didn’t have to worry about doing chores for the hosts. It was a much better experience.

I find it so odd to claim that explaining my prior experience is "ragebait". It's what I experienced over 100s of stays, consistently. That's only _part_ of what I experienced though. I stopped using the service by my own volition. They have changed some rules since, but those fees and rules were not the tipping point. The decline in service, misadvertising of spaces, poor customer service and general decline in value stop me from continuing to use AirBnB. I've been forced into an AirBnB recently, and it was the same nonsense. I could not pull into the driveway because the curb was incorrectly built. Host argued with me that it was fine, drove over and couldn't get their OWN car into it. Then they claimed they hadn't been to the property "in months" and "since the work was done"????? They told me I could park at a nearby grocery store and walk over, but they wouldn't be refunding me. AirBnB sided with them. I logged everything with photos (including the hosts car unable to get into the driveway), screenshots and had my company file a chargeback. Doesn't even make it into my top 50 worst experiences. Total joke.

I'm talking about the cleaning fee specifically being part of ragebait. You are paying for the cleaning service and whatever operating costs an Airbnb or hotel has otherwise they wouldn't be in business. Whether they put "CLEANING FEE" on the checkout page or not is arbitrary and a total psychological effect, that's it. And it's no longer there on Airbnb. I don't know where you are using Airbnb, but seems weird to me that you're saying 100s of stays have been miserable for you. If it were that bad for everyone nobody would be using it and yet Airbnb is growing YoY. Pretty much everyone I know (including myself) has maybe 1-2 bad experiences over dozens of stays. And sure some stays are "fine" and not amazing. But hotels are not necessary much more reliable these days - I've had to leave more hotels in the last 2 years over broken/missing amenities, smells, dilapated rooms, etc than I ever have Airbnbs. Many don't do daily room cleaning any more. It doesn't really line up with the rosy view of hotels that proliferates on here and they have far fewer excuses with dedicated staff, extra rooms, etc.

The AirBnb model just fell apart with bad customer experiences. Customers want something closer to a hotel experience. The moment Airbnb started letting hosts treat guests like children doing chores they lost a huge chunk of the market. It’s ultimately an issue of consistency. If I book with a name brand hotel I have some comfort knowing they have corporate standards that tend to be enforced consistently across properties. If a Hilton, Marriott etc hotel has issues it tends to get dealt with quickly because those brands know consistency is their brand. In extreme cases they will kick hotels out of their brand. That randomly named hotel that used to be a brand name was likely kicked out of the portfolio for compliance issues. With an AirBnb it’s a total crapshoot. Sometimes it’s totally fine, other times you’d end up in the dirty lair of a psychopath.

I mean, some customers want the hostel experience, too. The problem is a lot of AirBnB hosts want to offer the hostel experience for hotel prices.

These are all self-inflicted wounds by AirBnB. I have used AirBnB a few times in the past, but these days opt for a hotel instead if I can. They could take user feedback seriously, but chose not to. Case in point: we booked a place in Hawaii. We (2 people) arrived the day of, tired as heck from the beach activities. Place looked fine, except for the crumbs of food in the nooks and crannies of the kitchen. No big deal. We crashed almost right away, too tired to do anything else. An hour later, my wife jumped up, claiming some insect was walking on her legs. I turned on the lights sleepily, and lo and behold, there were cockroaches on the ceiling, scurrying about (and one had fallen and landed on my wife's legs). In the middle of the night, I contacted AirBnB help. They wanted proof. So I took a video and sent it, along with photos. Finally around 2AM they agreed that we should get out of there. We packed up and left for the beach, to wait things out. My first reaction was: I should leave a review telling people about the roaches. But guess what? AirBnB cancelled our reservation, so there was no way to rate the place or leave a review! They did refund me, but we wasted a day trying to catch up on the lost sleep. After that experience, I stopped booking AirBnBs if I could help it. They (and VRBO) are a last resort for me (no pun intended).

While AirBnB might be bad, my mom booked a place using Agoda. It was a NIGHTMARE. Admittedly this was in Egypt, but the unit was filthy and seemed to be owned by a company in the UAE. If it was just the filth, it could be like any other terrible experience, but this mid-rise was standing next to the rubble of a razed building beside it and there was literally an open gas pipe hanging upright two floors down with people smoking above. The doorman who showed us the unit seemed unconcerned and it was nearly impossible to get our money back until we literally threatened to sue Agoda. We had sent them all our evidence (we took pictures) and even had the doorman talk to them on the phone and it was still like pulling teeth to get them to refund us. To add insult to injury the place was more expensive than nearby hotels and I just checked and the place is still listed (we went a year ago)!

This was intentional. Airbnb removes or prevents as many low ratings as they can: https://x.com/levelsio/status/2107088849163665717

Prices for higher-end lake homes/cabins/vacation homes etc., for AirBnB and VRBO are roughly equivalent where I live. This is pretty much the only kind of AirBNB I'll consider, and it is usually more about the the location of the home (on a lake, near skiing, etc) and it being large enough to split amongst others. Also many are managed by property management companies and list across multiple platforms. If I can track down the company I'll directly contact to see if there are cheaper rates. IMO this is basically the only category of AirBnb that's worth considering and it doesn't seem like a big growth area.

The property management companies are great - you can even haggle with them. I love how clearly they identify themselves on both AirBNB and VRBO. You just have to be willing to give up the (false) security of booking through AirBNB.

My experience in Japan is quite the opposite. A good place gets 3 stars because it's up to expectations, while any perceived slight from staff can easily get that down to 2 stars. Reviews of 4 stars or more from locals tend to correspond to some special experience.

Japan is unique in the world for the stringency of its service standards, in my experience. However, if you use western review services instead of their domestic versions, all bets are off. Google Maps, Yelp, etc., are packed with stuff tourists love, which no local would touch. Things that locals find unbelievably rude get 5 stars on Yelp. Tourists think that this stuff is still higher quality than what is found outside of Japan (which it usually is), but things have definitely begun to degrade with the tourist boom.

Yeah but what if they dont?

I have been using the platform for about a decade and have never once seen an Airbnb without cleaning fees

There isn't an easy exploit for this PHP vulnerability (eliastaylor.com)

>> There's something important to be said here about how many people have Claude/GPT make design decisions for them, and how AI is the primary decision maker in the world right now. I suppose majority of the them now...

For me, what was strange is there were no write-ups on how the vulnerability actually worked. It really does feel like a lot of people went "Claude found a bug, and Claude says it's dangerous" but no one actually verified how exploitable it actually is? Not to say its worth ignoring, but compared to Heartbleed (where exploits had to be written by hand) there are a lot fewer active PoCs.

There are multiple write-ups on how the vulnerability works. The Calif one is the most detailed. Also, no one used Claude. There's a whole world of information out there when you read the original sources instead of social media distortions. https://calif.io/php2shell/ https://www.wiz.io/blog/php2shell-php-rce

> We all deep down know that PHP is insecure Do we? This was certainly true years ago. But I haven't really thought that modern PHP was any worse than any other scripting language.

When they confuse the CA issue and the PHP issue in the opening paragraph, I have a hard time trusting their analysis

"I know, I know. It's all you're hearing about. That, and the number 4." Doesn't look like confusion to me.

If they're so confident this isn't exploitable this person should stand up a very basic nginx running php-fpm server running in an exploitable version of PHP and invite people to exploit it.

I totally agree. We can sit here and posture all day, maybe it might justify our paychecks. Exploit it and show me why it’s fucked. Otherwise it’s just words As Linus says: talk is cheap; show me the code

Name a more iconic trio when it comes to exploits.

Not a trio, but Magento beats all of these 3 combined when it comes to being an exploitable POS.

But these communities all patched it immediately too. Does that not say something about the iconic trio when it comes to responsiveness?

They've had a lot of practice. Usain Bolt was also really fast because he ran a lot.

RCE is incredibly dangerous not because it lets you execute arbitrary code, but because it lets you execute some code. Code you're not supposed to execute. As soon as someone can do that, all they have to do is probe until they find something to chain. Almost every system on the internet has some local code you can chain to gain root, or a way to put some in place. It gets worse when it affects legacy systems, because they're the bastard stepchild of security. RCE on a box that hasn't been patched since Obama's first term is what little blackhats' dreams are made of. And developers are way too lazy to intentionally design their apps into different privilege domains to protect against chaining. Unless your app runs chroot() (is my neckbeard showing?) or in a container with nothing but a Go binary, somebody can LFI it. A crack in the door is plenty of space to get a crowbar in (especially with interpreted languages).

But the author isn't saying that this isn't a crack in the door. He says it is. It's just not a wide open door.

Core run time vulnerabilities in PHP, the language and runtime itself, are rare. I remember the days when an exploit in the JVM was a daily announcement. To the point where they had to ban java applets from the web.

> Core run time vulnerabilities in PHP, the language and runtime itself, are rare. They may be rare today but they have historically been very common. > To the point where they had to ban java applets from the web. Those are not RCEs, they were sandbox violations. Sandboxing untrusted code is hard and really only javascript engines have pulled it off. Java and Dotnet gave up, and that's fine. PHP's security failures are not from trying something ambitious. They're from generating web content on a server. These are not comparable.

It didn't 'take down a sizable chunk of the Internet'. Site owners took down their sites because of FUD and mass hysteria.

It's not getting tripped by "mass hysteria" to be careful and go offline for a couple hours. Your average site is fine at 99.9% uptime.

IMO it is a little bit silly to describe “a system that works well until it intersects with a trillion dollar company’s PR campaign” as an outdated failure.

Or perhaps, trillion dollar companies should be more responsible. Either because they fear regulation that will force them to be responsible, or because there is regulation that will make the responsible.

Security Disclosure (blog.railway.com)

meanwhile on railway.com: Ship software peacefully

sighs Thankfully I'm only using Railway for a hobby project (aptly, for a real-time transit dashboard) but still

Aw shit. I just got done patching our PHP servers, now I gotta do the Railway too? I swear I'm gonna wake up to a Vercel SNAFU.

It's 5:20 AM here in Europe and I just rotated a bunch of keys. Only to read, > Because deployments are paused, you will not be able to redeploy your services to pick up the new credentials until builds are restored. We will post here when builds resume with any additional details. So now my service does not work . Which is worse: a stolen key or a broken product? I'm genuinely regretting following their advice on rotating keys, because logs showed no sign of incorrect usage, and our service would at least have remained online. I hope that they automatically redeploy their customer services. I just worry that I won't have tested it. I mean: 5AM. Keys changed. Nothing more I can do. Should go back to sleep. No timeline to wake up to check deployments, so... I... wait?

The customers of my company are angry. It is 9.45 AM here in SE Asia. Things are bad.

Same situation. Frankly unbelievable - how do you not lead with this? You can't tell customers to rotate their keys and not inform them in the same breath them that actually, environment variable updates currently cannot deploy.

They did.

Their first message where they recommended rotating keys did not make that clear (though obviously if you cannot deploy, rotating keys means you will go down)

No. They did not. From https://blog.railway.com/p/security-disclosure-wednesday-october-21st : > What you should do: As such, we strongly recommend that you immediately roll all environment variables, including any API keys, stored in Railway, as well as any private registry credentials, and review logs for those services for unusual activity. > All deployments are paused while we investigate. Until builds are restored, you will not be able to roll out new versions. We apologize for this inconvenience. They lead with rotating keys. Next, I did not realize that this meant not being able to restart an existing deployment to bring up new env vars. They also speak of builds. I don’t need a new build. I need my existing deployment to work. It was not at all clear ‘paused’ mean this; maybe I should have realized, but I had interpreted it as doing new deployments or builds. New services. Code changes. New builds as they even say. It’s fully reasonable to pause that in this sort of situation and so I had interpreted their statement that way. If there is a clear impact from following advice — ‘do what we recommend and your service will not function’ — those who provide that advice need to make that clear.

Yup, got my OpenRouter key. They managed to run up a whole $2 on Opus 5.5 and Fable. Well, time for a new hosting provider I guess... Incidentally, I'm testing Muse as an email triage agent today - it buried "oh also, railway and anthropic say yours keys have been leaked and you need to rotate asap" under 50 routine deploy / admin emails notifications. Oh to live through such an AI powered software renaissance!

Hahaha, you're giving Muse access to a mailbox? Good luck, have fun.

Which secrets were they using?

The secret ones

>We believe this is part of a series of attacks recently targeting platform companies with the aim of compromising AI inference providers. Is that an accusation? As in, major AI players taking out competitors ?

I don’t think that’s what’s implied here. Possibly they are trying to get API tokens of providers to distill their own models.

I think the pingcap hack might be the biggest of them all, somehow it has gone under the radar. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50173716

That was a single company, the cert problem hit something like 70% of all websites and devices .

Hi Angelo from Railway here. This is very much me. https://x.com/ngeloxyz/status/2113077263386239309?s=20 We have gotten a lot of comments about why didn't we just message the breach sooner when people have noticed compromise with their accounts. I think that crit is fair and justified, and although we have been up for days on end- I don't blame you if you don't have sympathy for us. Our thought process was that we didn't want to recommend that people roll keys when we couldn't possibly confirm that we confidently plugged the breach and rolled the mitigation(s). I am comfortable to publicly say that this was a highly motivated attacker. Meanwhile, our threat team mitigates DDoSes, CVEs, while been patching everything immediately as dealt with exploits. As for this breach in particular, we tried to balance a duty to warn, which we take very seriously... However, it took a significant amount of time on the order of hours to verify, reviewing, and keep up with the attacker as they attempted to move laterally around, and briefly, within the system. We didn't want message anything beyond a shadow of a doubt that there were no further exploit paths. We take the view that we would like to "aviate, navigate, then communicate" when we deal with incidents like these then we prepared communications to the public and all users. While it was ongoing, we were in contact with external partners and vendors to revoke keys (the source of some online chatter) with investigators that required time and coordination. On the incident side of the house, it's a suite of bad options, we're still in the middle of it making sure customers are safe. But, hopefully this offers a view into our thought process. Formal postmortem after we fully restore service and complete the investigation. Apologies to all, I personally I feel like I let everyone down.

> and although we have been up for days on end- I don't blame you if you don't have sympathy for us. From my timezone, this started last night and is ongoing into today. Has this been going for longer than the status page and email indicated? If so, why was notification delayed so long? I love your product, have an incredible amount of sympathy for you as humans (having been in similar sleep-consuming nightmares) and was willing to forgive the GCP-triggered outage as an understandable teething pain, but sadly this response has really knocked my confidence. I understand the hard reality of security issues -- "urgently rotate your keys, they're already compromised" is an important message to share -- but "sorry, that will also require your site going down because we've blocked deploys" (presumably as a response to the incident...) is an incredibly frustrating situation to find ourselves in.

Sure, I guess there are a ton of dumb people. But please name a few sites that aren't slop ecom fly by nights... I cant think of any serious business that runs on raleway. I dont understand using any PaaS that essentially functions by arbitraging aws to people that are scared of an aws dashboard at a 3x markup. Seems like a decent platform for toy projects not for enterprise.

Maybe I'm finally old, but I don't see how it's surprising that Raleway is at all successful. Heroku built the same business ~15 years ago and had plenty of "enterprise" clients. I don't really understand if there's that much more value in Raleway vs Vercel, and Vercel claims to have OpenAI and Meta as clients.

> But please name a few sites that aren't slop ecom fly by nights. https://railway.com/customers tripadvisor and bilt, maybe? It's pretty common to have "toy" infrastructure in a non-tech business

Not sure where you see TripAdvisor on there? And what even is bilt?

Claude Duet (claude.com)

As much as I would love to make the most of these tools, I am not confident that yielding control of my personal data won't hurt me - and this seems like table-stakes, based on the type of value everyone is getting from them. I dont even know what should be private anymore - if US federal agencies can just buy ad data, join it with Flock, sprinkle Instagram in there, and inner join Social Security dump from doge, do I just give up and put the sex toys in the parlor window? Am I one OpenAI-sued-by-a-newspaper away from giving up the ghost?

I cant think of a single reason why Id need a personal assistant, human or LLM based. Most do not.

Powered by Opus 5.5 is incredible. I've been using ChatGPT Dot over Meta Muse/Instinct/Grok Bot because it's been powered by Astra and I find having a personal assistant that's using a true frontier model makes a huge difference in how much I can just trust the output without doing the work again myself just to double check the results. In the past month since Dot came out, I've literally bought a car with almost the entire process handled by Dot, and am now in the process of buying a house in Kyoto, in a language I don't speak at all, coordinating with an obscene amount of moving parts and logistics, flawlessly handled entirely by Dot, from finding the home to scheduling visits with real estate agents to finding judicial scriveners and getting a hanko stamp and scheduling inspections and applying for insurance and all sorts of insane tasks that would have taken infinitely longer and been unbelievably painful on my own. So, so excited to see what Duet looks like with Opus 5.5. Going to try switching over as soon as I get off the waitlist. Curious how other people have found these agents as well - always love hearing and seeing what other people have done with these things and how to improve my flow even better. I feel like I'm very close to being able to essentially offload every single task I do on a computer to an agent like this.

I've largely found Muse to be annoying, it's pestering me about emails that don't matter and messages I've already read. I did find it cool how it can order stuff for me and I ordered a suit but I've always found it get blocked from useful things like Amazon. I also find that it's loop isn't wide enough, like I'll tell it to book cake for a party and it finds 3 and I still need to go in and keep prompting it. Curious to try Dots when it's not uber-expensive

This is cool, but I still don't understand how this is different from just a Claude session, with a browser. Everything you described here is, from my experience, easily handled by a regular agent session these days. I fail to see what the personal assistant (dot, etc) adds.

This is just wrong. The agent reacts to emails, messages, all sorts of updates. It's constantly on, doing as much as it can without your input, and listening and looking for ways to advance the task at hand and has a long-running memory specifically on that task. A claude session typically times out and is waiting for your input at lots of steps in the process, and is constantly compacting to maintaing the memory space.

I don't think so? I have had plenty of claude sessions running for days, just tell them to maintain a markdown file with state and check stuff in the background and react to it. How do you think these PAs are implemented internally? Pretty much like that. If you want it to answer emails all you need to do is "watch for emails coming in answer them" and it will write a background watcher script for it and manage itself, it's just a prompt. Of course assuming it can access your emails/browser, but that's the same with these personal assistant products. No idea what you even mean by "a session times out"

They pretty obviously aren't. Why do you even feel the need to say this? What's the point? I'm not speaking on the behalf of the original commenter obviously, but as a passer-by, I find this comment to be very rude and tone deaf considering how much time likely went into writing such a thoughtful and comprehensive comment.

Thank you! I really appreciate you taking the time to write this, it restores some faith in the humanity of internet commenters to see a fair bit of defense here :). Please keep being awesome!

Correct.... very suspect. Swear you can't trust many posts anymore. Should we all start congregating in person online to debate lol? I'm very serious.

lol says the account one day old to my account that’s over 15 years old with clear established comment history with the exact same type of writing going back way before the advent of llms

This is a phenomenon I've noticed - even if AI isn't being used to edit their posts, I think profilic exposure to AI chatbots can rub off on a person and affect their conversation style.

It's started rubbing off on me too and I find it irritating when I'm chatting with someone and an AI-ism starts rolling off my tongue. I'm beginning to think I should: a) ask my agents to unslop[1] themselves when communicating back to me, and b) decide upon some writing standard and ask my agents to adhere to that. [1] https://github.com/cursor/plugins/blob/main/pstack/skills/unslop/SKILL.md

That's almost a compliment because my comments are giant stream of consciousness rants that absolutely don't follow best writing practices and are all just massive run on sentences :) I do use - hyphens a lot, but not em-dashes because 1. I never even realized there was a difference until LLMs came out and 2. I'm too lazy to figure out how to write a real em-dash I'm guessing you're just saying this because the comments are insanely long from the ranting? I'd be curious what else gives off LLM vibes because I'm quite positive if you throw any of these comments into any Pangram ish thing you'll find that it's absolutely not LLM generated in the slightest. I have an extremely distinctive writing style that far predates LLMs - here's a representative sample of my writing from 9 years ago https://medium.com/@intenex/cryptocurrency-101-7197684775fd that pretty clearly shows my distinct style of not-very-LLMish-but-clearly-very-long-and-ranty writing :)

3. AGENTS.md tells you not to

That's a good point - there's an argument to be made that I'm closer to the metal in a sense of understanding every part of the transaction vs abstracting it away fully to a human agent to handle each part themselves. It's the same with my taxes - this year I had Astra fully audit my tax returns vs just blindly trusting my CPA as I had in the past, and it both identified and thoroughly explained to me several discrepancies and filing nuances that I never before would have ever learned about. I think the reality is such that today most people also don't learn or do that much and just abstract things away to more specialized humans at exorbitantly higher price points.

i did this with opus5.5 this year and it caught an 8000$ mistake. Obviously i should find a new CPA, but i have found it incredibly helpful. One downside is that it will likely also flag a bunch of "by the book" libilities to how your filing that I'm pretty sure most CPA would let slide.

Whilst I appreciate the impact of AI and its long-term implications for humanity as we know it, I am getting kinda tired of seeing so many AI-related headlines here on HN. Perhaps it's just me, but I feel like every day the front page is filled with mostly LLM-related announcements.

Unslop.news