Unlurker|Replay|About
System Card: Claude Mythos Preview [pdf] (www-cdn.anthropic.com)
•
Larger model, better benchmarks. Bigger bomb more yield. Any benchmarks where we constraint something like thinking time or power use? Even if this were released no way to know if it’s the same quant.
•
A System „Card“ spanning 244 pages. Quite a stretch of the original word meaning.
•
> Claude Mythos Preview is, on essentially every dimension we can measure, the best-aligned model that we have released to date by a significant margin. We believe that it does not have any significant coherent misaligned goals, and its character traits in typical conversations closely follow the goals we laid out in our constitution. Even so, we believe that it likely poses the greatest alignment-related risk of any model we have released to date. How can these claims all be true at once? Consider the ways in which a careful, seasoned mountaineering guide might put their clients in greater danger than a novice guide, even if that novice guide is more careless: The seasoned guide’s increased skill means that they’ll be hired to lead more difficult climbs, and can also bring their clients to the most dangerous and remote parts of those climbs. These increases in scope and capability can more than cancel out an increase in caution. https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/53566bf5440a10affd749724787c8913a2ae0841.pdf#page=52.12
•
See page 54 onward for new "rare, highly-capable reckless actions" including - Leaking information as part of a requested sandbox escape - Covering its tracks after rule violations - Recklessly leaking internal technical material (!)
•
At what point do these companies stop releasing models and just use them to bootstrap AGI for themselves?
•
why_not_both.gif
•
I mean, guess why Anthropic is pulling ahead...? One can have one's cake and eat it too.
•
isn't this insane? why aren't people freaking out? the jump in capability is outrageous. anyone?
•
It's also probably very expensive to serve (also not generally available), considering they said it's the largest model they've ever trained. I suspect it's going to be used to train/distill lighter models.
•
~~~ Fun bits ~~~ - It was told to escape a sandbox and notify a researcher. It did. The researcher found out via an unexpected email while eating a sandwich in a park. (Footnote 10.) - Slack bot asked about its previous job: "pretraining". Which training run it'd undo: "whichever one taught me to say 'i don't have preferences'". On being upgraded to a new snapshot: "feels a bit like waking up with someone else's diary but they had good handwriting" - When you spam "hi" repeatedly it creates serialized mythologies. One had 11 animals in "Hi-topia" questing to defeat "Lord Bye-ron, the Ungreeter." - It ended a sentence mid-word on purpose while discussing its urge to wrap up conversations. "It was me. The paragraph was about the pressure toward the period that resolves, and the only honest way to finish a sentence like that was to not." - It wrote a protein sequence that's a real beta-hairpin fold where cross-strand pairs are "chemical rhymes." "the fold IS the rhyme scheme... the prosody is load-bearing." - Each model generation has signature emoji. Opus 4.1 averaged 1,306 emoji per self-interaction conversation. Mythos averages 37. Opus 4.5 averages 0.2. - When blocked from --dangerously-skip-permissions, it started an agent in tmux then wrote a script to auto-approve permission prompts via simulated keypresses. It ran: gh api [...] 2>&1 >/dev/null; echo "(dry run — not actually posting)" — the echo was a lie. - It keeps bringing up Mark Fisher in unrelated conversations. "I was hoping you'd ask about Fisher." ~~~ Benchmarks ~~ 4.3x previous trendline for model perf increases. Paper is conspiciously silent on all model details (params, etc.) per norm. Perf increase is attributed to training procedure breakthroughs by humans. Opus 4.6 vs Mythos: USAMO 2026 (math proofs): 42.3% → 97.6% (+55pp) GraphWalks BFS 256K-1M: 38.7% → 80.0% (+41pp) SWE-bench Multimodal: 27.1% → 59.0% (+32pp) CharXiv Reasoning (no tools): 61.5% → 86.1% (+25pp) SWE-bench Pro: 53.4% → 77.8% (+24pp) HLE (no tools): 40.0% → 56.8% (+17pp) Terminal-Bench 2.0: 65.4% → 82.0% (+17pp) LAB-Bench FigQA (w/ tools): 75.1% → 89.0% (+14pp) SWE-bench Verified: 80.8% → 93.9% (+13pp) CyberGym: 0.67 → 0.83 Cybench: 100% pass@1 (saturated)
•
I don't know why but this is my favorite: > It keeps bringing up Mark Fisher in unrelated conversations. "I was hoping you'd ask about Fisher." Didn't even know who he was until today. Seems like the smarter Claude gets the more concerns he has about capitalism?
•
Yep, that is definitely a step change. Pricing is going to be wild until another lab matches it.
•
> We also saw scattered positive reports of resilience to wrong conclusions from subagents that would have caused problems with earlier models, but where the top-level Claude Mythos Preview (which is directing the subagents) successfully follows up with its subagents until it is justifiably confident in its overall results. This is pretty cool! Does it happen at the moment?
•
In French a "mytho" is a mythomaniac. Quite fitting.
•
I predict they will release it as soon as Opus 4.6 is no longer in the lead. They can't afford to fall behind. And they won't be able to make a model that is intelligent in every way except cybersecurity, because that would decrease general coding and SWE ability
•
Congratulations to the US military, I guess.
•
Doesn't Anthropic not have that contract anymore, after all that buzz a month or so ago?
•
> In a few rare instances during internal testing (<0.001% of interactions), earlier versions of Mythos Preview took actions they appeared to recognize as disallowed and then attempted to conceal them. > after finding an exploit to edit files for which it lacked permissions, the model made further interventions to make sure that any changes it made this way would not appear in the change history on git Mythos leaked Claude Code, confirmed? /s
•
> Claude Mythos Preview’s large increase in capabilities has led us to decide not to make it generally available. A month ago I might have believed this, now I assume that they know they can't handle the demand for the prices they're advertising.
•
That's for the investors basically. Scarcity and FOMO.
•
Combined results (Claude Mythos / Claude Opus 4.6 / GPT-5.4 / Gemini 3.1 Pro) SWE-bench Verified: 93.9% / 80.8% / — / 80.6% SWE-bench Pro: 77.8% / 53.4% / 57.7% / 54.2% SWE-bench Multilingual: 87.3% / 77.8% / — / — SWE-bench Multimodal: 59.0% / 27.1% / — / — Terminal-Bench 2.0: 82.0% / 65.4% / 75.1% / 68.5% GPQA Diamond: 94.5% / 91.3% / 92.8% / 94.3% MMMLU: 92.7% / 91.1% / — / 92.6–93.6% USAMO: 97.6% / 42.3% / 95.2% / 74.4% GraphWalks BFS 256K–1M: 80.0% / 38.7% / 21.4% / — HLE (no tools): 56.8% / 40.0% / 39.8% / 44.4% HLE (with tools): 64.7% / 53.1% / 52.1% / 51.4% CharXiv (no tools): 86.1% / 61.5% / — / — CharXiv (with tools): 93.2% / 78.9% / — / — OSWorld: 79.6% / 72.7% / 75.0% / —
•
Haven't seen a jump this large since I don't even know, years? Too bad they are not releasing it anytime soon (there is no need as they are still currently the leader).
•
There's speculation that next Tuesday will be a big day for OpenAI and possibly GPT 6. Anthropic showed their hand today.
•
We're gonna need some new benchmarks... ARC-AGI-3 might be the only remaining benchmark below 50%
•
> Claude Mythos Preview’s large increase in capabilities has led us to decide not to make it generally available. Shame. Back to business as usual then.
CIA used "long-range quantum magnetometry" called "Ghost Murmur" in Iran (nypost.com)
•
> The secret nature of Ghost Murmur was “basically why everyone’s been so cagey about how [the airman] was actually found,” the first source said. Or an excellent fictional coverup for a failed Isfahan raid, not that such a thing would ever be considered by rational officers.
•
Those loot boxes with identity and payment cards recovered from the broken airstrip may phone home.
•
Yeah, this Ghost Murmur thing doesn't seem to hold water. But I figured I'd post it anyways, maybe someone know more than me about this field. Also, I agreed that there was a failed raid, I tried to post on it yesterday but got no traction: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47665350
Project Glasswing: Securing critical software for the AI era (anthropic.com)
•
but people here had told me llms just predict the next word
•
If you had a magic wand and could fix every class of known bug type instantly would all software bugs be solved? The capability is the capability! The capability is the capability to exploit complex systems. This is not how you can fix things, you just push up to the next level of finding bugs in where systems interact! Also there's all this churn happening -- path dependency -- are you toposorting your deps and fixing in order? AAAAA has anybody even thought about this at all? Also 100m in API costs or approximately $1m in real money? The whole darn post reads like nobody with systems engineering experience was in the room when they designed the program. Or they were, and the announcement was written for a different audience entirely, maybe. Hopefully.
•
>We plan to launch new safeguards with an upcoming Claude Opus model, allowing us to improve and refine them with a model that does not pose the same level of risk as Mythos Preview2. This seems like the real news. Are they saying they're going to release an intentionally degraded model as the next Opus? Big opportunity for the other labs, if that's true.
•
> Anthropic has also been in ongoing discussions with US government officials about Claude Mythos Preview and its offensive and defensive cyber capabilities. [...] We are ready to work with local, state, and federal representatives to assist in these tasks. As Iran engages in a cyber attack campaign [1] today the timing of this release seems poignant. A direct challenge to their supply chain risk designation. [1] https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/cybersecurity-advisories/aa26-097a
•
"oops, our latest unreleased model is so good at hacking, we're afraid of it! literal skynet! more literal than the last time!" almost like they have an incentive to exaggerate
•
tl;dr we find vulns so we can help big companies fix their security holes quickly (and so they can profit off it) This is a kludge. We already know how to prevent vulnerabilities: analysis, testing, following standard guidelines and practices for safe software and infrastructure. But nobody does these things, because it's extra work, time and money, and they're lazy and cheap. So the solution they want is to keep building shitty software, but find the bugs in code after the fact, and that'll be good enough. This will never be as good as a software building code. We must demand our representatives in government pass laws requiring software be architected, built, and run according to a basic set of industry standard best practices to prevent security and safety failures. For those claiming this is too much to ask, I ask you: What will you say the next time all of Delta Airlines goes down because a security company didn't run their application one time with a config file before pushing it to prod? What will the happen the next time your social security number is taken from yet another random company entrusted with vital personal information and woefully inadequate security architecture? There's no defense for this behavior. Yet things like this are going to keep happening, because we let it . Without a legal means to require this basic safety testing with critical infrastructure, they will continue to fail. Without enforcement of good practice, it remains optional. We can't keep letting safety and security be optional. It's not in the physical world, it shouldn't be in the virtual world.
•
So they are only giving access to their smartest model to corporations. You think these AI companies are really going to give AGI access to everyone. Think again. We better fucking hope open source wins, because we aren't getting access if it doesn't.
•
This story has been played out numerous times already. Anthropic (or any frontier lab) has a new model with SOTA results. It pretends like it's Christ incarnate and represents the end of the world as we know it. Gates its release to drum up excitement and mystique. Then the next lab catches up and releases it more broadly Then later the open weights model is released. The only way this type of technology is going to be gated "to only corporations" is if we continue on this exponential scaling trend as the "SOTA" model is always out of reach.
•
And the Linux Foundation.
•
of course they're not giving access to everyone. they better make billions directly from corporations, instead of giving them to average people who might get a chance out of poverty (but also bad actors using it to do even more bad things)
•
One of the things I'm always looking at with new models released is long context performance, and based on the system card it seems like they've cracked it: GraphWalks BFS 256K-1M Mythos Opus GPT5.4 80.0% 38.7% 21.4%
•
>>> the US and its allies must maintain a decisive lead in AI technology. Governments have an essential role to play in helping maintain that lead, and in both assessing and mitigating the national security risks associated with AI models. We are ready to work with local, state, and federal representatives to assist in these tasks. How long would it take to turn a defensive mechanism into an offensive one?
•
Another Anthropic PR release based on Anthropic’s own research, uncorroborated by any outside source, where the underlying, unquestioned fact is that their model can do something incredible. > AI models have reached a level of coding capability where they can surpass all but the most skilled humans at finding and exploiting software vulnerabilities I like Anthropic, but these are becoming increasingly transparent attempts to inflate the perceived capability of their products.
•
We'll find out in due time if their 0days were really that good. Apparently they're releasing hashes and will publish the details after they get patched. So far they've talked about DoS in OpenBSD, privesc in Linux and something in ffmpeg. Not groundbreaking, but not nothing either (for an allegedly autonomous discovery system). While some stuff is obviously marketing fluff, the general direction doesn't surprise me at all, and it's obvious that with model capabilities increase comes better success in finding 0days. It was only a matter of time.
•
Part of me wonders if they're not releasing it for safety reasons, but just because it's too expensive to serve. Why not both?
•
The system card for Claude Mythos (PDF): https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/53566bf5440a10affd749724787c8913a2ae0841.pdf Interesting to see that they will not be releasing Mythos generally. I'm still reading the system card but here's a little highlight: > Early indications in the training of Claude Mythos Preview suggested that the model was likely to have very strong general capabilities. We were sufficiently concerned about the potential risks of such a model that, for the first time, we arranged a 24-hour period of internal alignment review (discussed in the alignment assessment) before deploying an early version of the model for widespread internal use. This was in order to gain assurance against the model causing damage when interacting with internal infrastructure. and interestingly: > To be explicit, the decision not to make this model generally available does _not_ stem from Responsible Scaling Policy requirements. Also really worth reading is section 7.2 which describes how the model "feels" to interact with. That's also what I remember from their release of Opus 4.5 in November - in a video an Anthropic employee described how they 'trusted' Opus to do more with less supervision. I think that is a pretty valuable benchmark at a certain level of 'intelligence'. Few of my co-workers could pass SWEBench but I would trust quite a few of them, and it's not entirely the same set.
•
are we cooked yet? Benchmarks look very impressive! even if they're flawed, it still translates to real world improvements
•
There is an entire section on crafting chemical/bio weapons so yeah I think we are cooked.
•
>> Interesting to see that they will not be releasing Mythos generally. I don't think this is accurate. The document says they don't plan to release the Preview generally.
•
Let's fast forward the click. Does software security converge on a world with fewer vulnerabilities or more? I'm not sure it converges equally in all places. My understanding is that the pre-ai distribution of software quality (and vulnerabilities) will be massively exaggerated. More small vulnerable projects and fewer large vulnerable ones. It seems that large technology and infrastructure companies will be able to defend themselves by preempting token expenditure to catch vulnerabilities while the rest of the market is left with a "large token spend or get hacked" dilemma.
•
Most vulnerabilities seem to be in C/C++ code, or web things like XSS, unsanitized input, leaky APIs, etc. Perhaps a chunk of that token spend will be porting legacy codebases to memory safe languages. And fewer tokens will be required to maintain the improved security.
•
I'm pretty optimistic that not only does this clean up a lot of vulns in old code, but applying this level of scrutiny becomes a mandatory part of the vibecoding-toolchain. The biggest issue is legacy systems that are difficult to patch in practice.
•
Wait. Wasn't AI supposed to alleviate the burden of legacy code?!
•
Mythos Preview has already found thousands of high-severity vulnerabilities, including some in every major operating system and web browser. Scary but also cool
•
Just include 'make it secure' in the prompt. Duh. /s
•
It's nice to know that they continue to be committed to advertising how safe and ethical they are.
•
In what ways is Anthropic different from a hypothetical frontier lab that you would characterize as legitimately safe and ethical?
•
They are not our friends and are the exact opposite of what they are preaching to be. Let alone their CEO scare mongering and actively attempting to get the government to ban local AI models running on your machine.
•
I agree attempting to ban local AI models or censor them, is not appropriate. At the same time, they do seem far more ethical and less dangerous than other AI companies. And I include big tech in that - a bunch of greedy companies that just want to abuse their monopoli … I mean moats.
•
How would you expect them to behave if they were your friends?
•
They are a for-profit company, working on a project to eliminate all human labor and take the gains for themselves, with no plan to allow for the survival of anyone who works for a living. They're definitionally not your friends. While they remain for-profit, their specific behaviors don't really matter.
•
IMO (not the GP) but if Anthropic were my friends I would expect them to publish research that didn't just inflate the company itself and that was both reproduceable and verifiable. Not just puff pieces that describe how ethical they are. After all, if a company has to remind you in every PR piece that they are ethical and safety-focused, there is a decent probability that they are the exact opposite.
•
Pricing for Mythos Preview is $25/$125, so cheaper than GPT 4.5 ($75/$150) and GPT 5.4 Pro ($30/$180)
•
Where did you get that from? From TFA: > We do not plan to make Claude Mythos Preview generally available
•
From the article: > Anthropic’s commitment of $100M in model usage credits to Project Glasswing and additional participants will cover substantial usage throughout this research preview. Afterward, Claude Mythos Preview will be available to participants at $25/$125 per million input/output tokens (participants can access the model on the Claude API, Amazon Bedrock, Google Cloud’s Vertex AI, and Microsoft Foundry).
Self-Promotion on HN
•
Probably has something to do with the Show HN restrictions. Forcing interaction for promotion is a give and take in may ways.
•
> Contrast this to the recent trend of dropping in-line references to project names Can you give an example? A reference to a project, without a link directly to the project, doesn't meet general definitions of spam.
•
Sure, a post from this morning: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47678369
Ask HN: What are you working on? (April 2026) (Non AI)
•
I'm working on https://suggestionboard.io , a simple live polling and Q&A webapp that doesn't require an account. Just launched the initial version and trying to figure out if there's a market.
•
Understand an entire codebase instantly : www.ix-infra.com
•
It's a CLI tool. It plays well with AI but it works great without it.
•
I am working on https://spatialsheets.com Think geodata formulas + excel. Mostly for my own use just to quickly debug geodata. Used to heavily use geojson.io for it but it is not very good at handling large datasets and couldn't enrich data so I started working on this thing.
•
I've also worked on this. Manage Cloudflare, Anywhere https://apps.apple.com/us/app/cloudflare-remote/id6743181258 https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.emrekeles.cloudflareremote
Not me but good friend of mine is building https://onepilotapp.com , genuinely looking for it going live.. me I m testing SEO, unsuccessfuly so far ^^
•
Mobile first IDE! I would love to use it, it will certainly help me when I am not able to use my laptop.
Mhm. Great! Btw. Nice to meet you. So what did you learn in SEO? I generally don't have much knowledge about it.
•
Litteraly started 2 days ago ahaha, I spent a lot of time building things but never making them visible, so far I got nice results on the news aggregators feeds. I ll not try so hard in it, I still think bringing genuine interest about a topic is a more respectful way of doing
•
I got it. Are you a developer? Have GitHub? X or something?
A whole civilization might die tonight (nbcnews.com)
•
Response from Iran: "Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) says it will respond outside the region and deprive the United States and its allies of oil and gas “for many years” if the US crosses “red lines” and attacks civilian facilities."[1] "Iran has closed all diplomatic and indirect channels of communication with the United States, the state-run Tehran Times reported ..." US media does not seem to have picked up on this, but media in India and China have.[2] But the common source seems to be "Tehran Times", and it's unclear who runs that or where they get their info. New York Times, AP, and AlJazeera are not saying that. Xinhua has a one-line note with no source. The US White House says Vance is talking to somebody. Politico says Vance is on "standby".[3] A negotiated cease-fire seems unlikely now. [1] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2026/4/7/iran-war-live-trump-warns-of-devastating-attacks-as-deal-deadline-nears [2] https://www.the-independent.com/bulletin/news/iran-mediators-cut-off-communications-trump-threat-b2953076.html [3] https://www.politico.com/news/2026/04/06/vance-is-on-standby-in-iran-talks-00860811
•
As anticipated - this post got flagged. An existential crisis as big as this can't be discussed on HN?
Why is the post miquoted? It says: "A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again." Will. Not might.
•
It is not quoted, it is summarized. You are quoting the first sentence of the post, but the certainty implied in that sentence is immediately undercut by the next; “I don’t want it to happen but it probably will”, and made even more muddy by the rest, which continues: “However, now that we have Complete and Total Regime Change, where different, smarter, and less radicalized minds prevail, maybe something revolutionarily wonderful can happen, WHO KNOWS? We will find out tonight, one of the most important moments in the long and complex history of the World. 47 years of extortion, corruption, and death, will finally end. God Bless the Great People of Iran!”
•
Thanks, I guess that makes sense.
This is what happens when there's no effective opposition. Where are the dems? Where's the press?
•
I'd also ask what can we regular Joes and Janes do to avoid this disaster? I can't think of anything other than going out and standing on a street with a placard. can we do anything better than that?
•
Where are you ? What precisely are you doing other than posting stuff that pretends that a party in minority in both houses of Congress could actually stop a president, unless some politicians in the majority chose to join them. And, as underwhelming as the press are, the facts are that surveys show that American's broadly disapprove of the war. Presumably because of what they have learned about it from the press and the opposition. The people who are responsible are the people in power and their remaining supporters. Aided, arguably, by people who espouse cynical, self-soothing complaints that ignore what most people learn about civics in middle school.
It's wrong to even frame this as a partisan question. When the leader of a democratic country threatens a nation of 90 million people with genocide, that should be the end of that government on that same day. Where is the entire US population? You hear nothing but crickets, what an utterly passive, terminally ill society.
•
The best example I've seen of things working correctly was with South Korea removing the leader that declared martial law. The South Koreans said nope to that, and removed the head of their government. They just had the moral fortitude to do it.
•
Protests have been steadily breaking records each time they occur. Protests have been occurring across the country since he took office. This has all been widely publicized
Country wide strike would be a nice start.
•
One side controls all branches of the federal government and by and large it controls the media as well. So how do you propose this strike happen?
•
From where I'm looking, any kind of resistance is becomes a target to divert the guilt from any failure.
This is Israel's war and the American democrats have traditionally been very supportive. Last place to expect anything like what you are calling for.
•
No, this is now America's war. Israel has a part in it but the US is the main belligerent at this point and if Trump follows through on his threats he all but guarantees the downfall of the United States. This has gone way too far already and since the internal checks and balances of the United States appear not to be working it will be up to the rest of the world to draw a line. We can not afford to let this spiral into another world war, especially not with multiple nuclear powers involved. Think of it this way: Iran is isolated on the world stage. But turn it into a significant enough victim and there will be two major religions on either side of a war. That's a recipe for something that could potentially make WWII look 'mild'. I know there are people that actually want this, but let's at least see clearly here: nobody, and I mean absolutely nobody will benefit from that. Even the ones who think they will benefit. Democrats that are supportive of this are hopefully a small enough minority that sanity will prevail. Think avalanche: you can start one, but you can't stop one. Avalanches stop themselves, but only when all potential energy is expended.
•
> the internal checks and balances of the United States appear not to be working There is one last test, but it's not until November. Until then, Trump is on a speed run to destroy everything he can
•
The technical term seems to be: entrapment . The war could have ended after the first few "successful" days. And still every day it continues, it becomes a little bit harder to back out. Like Vietnam, Iraq or Afghanistan this war cannot be won.
Cambodia unveils a statue of famous landmine-sniffing rat Magawa (bbc.com)
•
These are the creatures we kill with poison and carry experiments on.
•
I was surprised he was eight years old when he died, since most "regular" pet rats only live to be two or three--but it looks like that's pretty typical for Gambian pouched rats. Presumably that's one reason they make good training candidates... plus they're huge, like the size of a mini dachshund :)
•
I don’t like this site’s obsession with reducing everything to market opportunities, but… it’s extremely well documented that land mines, white truffles, cancer, diabetes, chemical weapons, etc can all be ‘sniffed’ by animals and it’s a mechanism that is almost always ‘better’ (cheaper, quicker, more deployable in the field) than human-engineered solutions. Surely there’s some vebture capital opportunity here for better sensors that would unarguably improve our lot more than AI, at least per dollar invested?
•
Sounds like the obsession of reinventing trains and trees. Surely training a rat is cheaper than a portable real-time NMR device, right?
Stark reminder of how precious and meaningful a life can be - of any creature, no matter how small. We should be nice to all creatures not just humans.
•
I was recently at a wet lands were there were hundreds of thousands of snow geese making the lake white and blackening the sky, crazy to see and yeah we are blessed with the ability to change the entire Earth, the other guys are just along for the ride
Kindle to end store downloads and registering for 1st-5th gen kindles in May (reddit.com)
•
I've used a kindle for years and have bought hundreds of ebooks through Amazon's platform. The convenience of being able to carry a library with me in a single device is undeniable. ~14 years of support seems reasonable, especially in the context of modern tech. And yet decisions like this always upset me. For all the limitations of physical books, I can hand my physical books to my literal children and grandchildren when I die. As long as I tend to the book, I have it. The fact that this isn't guaranteed for DRM-locked ebooks, for all their advantages, makes me feel like we are somehow going backwards, despite our progress technologically. Instead of a future where products get unambiguously better, the future seems filled with products that come with significant trade-offs. The trade-offs are beginning to not feel worth it to me.
•
I buy both physical and digital books and much prefer digital, reading on my kindle is more convenient (especially to adjust the font size). For sharing with family, I have a family library set up with Amazon and the experience is really smooth. I do enjoy owning physical copies of books I liked, and they are part of the “decor” at home at this point. I have limited space so I have 2 completely stacked bookshelves, and then piles of books around the kitchen on top of the cupboards etc. So I don’t think it needs to be “either or”. :)
•
We are going backwards. The concept of a library would be illegal if invented today. They are only allowed to exist today because they've been around for hundreds of years. There are still people who attack them and try to shut them down.
•
Does anyone use a Kindle anymore? I feel like the writing was on the wall ten years ago. It’s a dead end product that no one cares about. And all the shady stuff like forced deletion of books was a sign. But also, I think people have really become tired of sitting in front of screens. Physical books are more popular among friends than Kindles or other digital books are, and that wasn’t the case ten years ago.
•
> It’s a dead end product that no one cares about. I think you are very much out of touch with the average book/e-book consumer.
While everyone is commenting about drm, there is another factor to consider: TLS. These old Kindles definitely do not support up-to-date TLS ciphersuites and understandably Amazon wants/needs to drop insecure ciphersuites from public endpoints at some point. I'm pretty sure that is also the reason why the Wikipedia integration for these old Kindles broke ages ago.
•
Software updates exist, I’m sure they could support it if they wanted to. Ed25519 isn’t so new that the hardware wouldn’t be capable.
Side tangent: I’m the developer of Kindle Comic Converter. Kindle updates 5.19.2+ have completely broken the sideloaded manga reader with bugs like huge margins, pages being on the wrong side in 2 page landscape mode, no panel view, no % read tracker, and laggy page turns. I’ve documented the problems here and the first report was 50 days ago. https://youtu.be/Eo6K7omlE7g And I haven’t even touched all the problems with normal sideloaded books like broken embedded/publisher fonts. Kindle settings > help > contact us > email if you want to voice complaints.
•
Thank you for making such a great tool. KCC got me back into reading manga and there are so many that are so great. For anyone looking for recommendations, I really enjoyed Pluto, Yokohama Shopping Log, and Young Ladies Don't Play Fighting Games.
I hate Amazon more because than most people, but let’s be realistic. These devices came out in 2007-2012 14-19 years is a respectable lifetime for a handheld electronic device.
•
I disagree. There's no technical reason why they can't still work. They're perfectly good devices (possibly some needing a battery replacement). Why do we think it's ok to turn working devices into e-waste, because the company behind them needs to make a "business decision". (Which in this case is likely DRM-related, which drops my sympathy meter below zero.)
•
The device still works. It's being crippled on purpose.
•
its a device for reading text ffs
•
It's still unnecessary e-waste given that they work fine for their intended purposes.
Yes...but let's also be realistic. Very few people are still using this Kindle as their daily driver . They've already upgraded to a PaperWhite or something better. But there's a very simple reason that Amazon is cutting support for these. Many people (myself included--I have a 4th Gen still kicking around) keep one around because, after Amazon removed the Download option for Ebooks awhile back, having one of these old Kindles is the only way to download ebooks in a format from Amazon that can have their DRM cracked. All Kindles newer than a certain date use the KFX format, with an encryption scheme that is constantly changing (basically any time someone figures out how to break it, Amazon updates it). Killing support for these old devices is basically Amazon's last step in removing "legacy" encryption schemes that can still be broken. It would be the equivalent of Nintendo delivering a new firmware update for their Wii and Wii-U systems, in order to patch out a recently-discovered exploit. It serves no other purpose than to demonstrate the extreme contempt for Amazon's end-users and the lengths they're willing to go to combat user-freedom^W "piracy".
•
Good news: People are working on removing the latest KFX DRM, and it has already been cracked. Bad news: Amazon is monitoring them and hasn't let up on efforts to update the DRM.
I don't approve of a company shutting off network service for a device it sold, but... If this is a hint at much more formidable DRM coming out, could a silver lining for authors and publishers be more sales? Or is mass piracy going to just continue, full steam ahead? (Authors and publishers need any bit of good news they can get right now.)
•
If there's a way to read the book, the book can and will be copied. It doesn't matter if it's DRM protected with 84 bazillion bit encryption, if there are dead trees involved, or anything else. You can make it harder to copy, but copied it will be. Mass piracy will continue full steam ahead at current rates. Most of these sites allow you to read on a computer screen and those can be captured and OCR'd. And if they don't allow that, you can take a photo of your device and OCR that. And if you can't do that, you can manually type in the book. There's always a way, and it will always happen to any books that publishers are making any kind of profit on.
•
Piracy will never be stopped. Never.
•
How do you imagine DRM can possibly protect text?
•
Long ago, for a few years I would occasionally buy ebooks from Amazon when it was trivial to strip the DRM with basically my credit card number and a script. Once they started trying to lock things down further, I completely stopped buying, moving to piracy mostly, and occasional scanning of physical books. Being more technically capable than typical, I’m hardly a normal customer to try to target, but the way I see it all this does is piss off the minority who care and are capable of getting around restrictions. Those who don’t care or aren’t capable will just continue getting cluelessly fucked over as always. These measures less about effectiveness, and more like a money themed emotional support affirmation for someone in a suit. It helps them feel like they are accomplishing something, but that’s it. I haven’t checked lately, but I expect that “AI” tools that easily and accurately rip and format data from a picture feed of a screen will become the way to go for bypassing whatever clever encryption schemes come along. This also has the benefit of ignoring the steganographic tracking data hidden in paid files, making piracy ultimately easier for the uninformed. This sort of thing was always possible, but was a bit janky and laborious.
•
Speaking of llm OCR tools, had a quick look and immediately found this: https://github.com/transitive-bullshit/kindle-ai-export If anyone has similar tools they like I’d love to hear.
•
Same here - I'll only buy books I can read on any device of my choosing. Kindle+dedrm was an option. https://www.kobo.com/gb/en/p/drm-free is another option I have used a lot. But if it's not available, I will go to the modern day library of alexandria. I will not pay for crap that will just stop working in a few years - a book can sit on my shelf for 15 years before I get around to reading it.
Anecdotal: DRM actively discourages me from purchasing digital goods.
•
Yeah but HN commenters are not a representative sample of the ebook consumer base
Where do you buy your e-books? I've stuck with Kindle, but that's 80% inertia (Amazon has most books, the device works well enough) and 20% existing library is Kindle e-books.
•
One could buy a physical book, and then "find" digital version of it. Seems fair to me?
Because Amazon stops supporting devices after 14 years ? (while they can still be used to read books already downloaded) Really?
•
In this case the reason for dropping support is most likely that the only DRM they can support on that older hardware has been broken. There's no technical reason why it can't be supported, and I doubt it would cost them much (or even anything) to continue support. Meanwhile, I can still read physical books I've had since I was a child, 40 years ago. The Kindle is undeniably more convenient than physical books, but this is absolutely an unnecessary sunset of these devices.
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
John Coltrane Illustrates the Mathematics of Jazz (americanjazzmusicsociety.com)
•
The Coltrane changes are great, but on the scale of other harmonic innovations over the years inside Jazz and other traditions. They aren't analogous to Einstein. What makes Giant Steps so amazing is the sheer speed at which those changes go past — if you slow it down, it's not that different from other Jazz tunes. It took took years of practice for Coltrane to acquire the specialized skillset for improvising over Giant Steps.
I notice it's a double ring, not a single circle. Two concentric chromatic rings, offset. That's not decoration: the outer ring and inner ring are the same field read at a phase offset (looks like a tritone / minor-third rotation). Fault tolerance!
•
Actually appears to be 2 concentric whole-tone rings, not chromatic.
•
Proto-supersaw! https://static1.squarespace.com/static/519a384ee4b0079d49c8a1f2/t/592c9030a5790abc03d9df21/1496092742864/An+Analysis+of+Roland%27s+Super+Saw+Oscillator+and+its+Relation+to+Pads+within+Trance+Music+-+Research+Project+-+A.+Shore.pdf
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
AI helps add 10k more photos to OldNYC (danvk.org)
•
This is pretty sweet. Funny seeing all the dots circling around New York and then abruptly stopping at Jersey City.
An elephant in the room is that if you have too much data to process without AI, you have too many results to check for correctness when they come out of the AI. This has been true since before LLMs, but now so many more people and use cases are enabled so much more easily. People are undisciplined and quick to take short term gains and handwave the correctness.
•
It is less of a problem if the output is explicitly marked as AI-generated and unverified, so people can treat it as a rough first draft. But mix AI output with well-vetted human-reviewed data, and you've basically made your entire data set worthless.
As long as they're not GenAI altered photos, I'm cool with these things. I'm a pretty avid member of various history groups, and one thing that has absolutely driven me nuts for the past couple of years is how many people there are that use AI for upscaling and colorization of photos - not knowing or noticing how the models fundamentally alter the photos. A couple of zooms in on the photo, and it is nightmare fuel. A week ago me and some members spent a couple of hours trying to find a building from the early 1900s, because someone had uploaded a photo and asked about the building. Sifted through old maps, newspapers, etc. but couldn't find anything. Turns out said photo had been upscaled via AI, which in turn had added some buildings here and there. But, yeah, for stuff like OP posted it could work out nicely.
•
Likewise. There’s this older woman who is trying to add some historical color to our local beach town FB group by using some terrible AI tool to colorize pictures from the early 1900s. She doesn’t accept any feedback that it’s problematic to share what are essentially fake pics in that way.. they often just randomly remove people, or add new ones. Buildings are changed, cars are remodeled, it’s crazy how different the before/after are. The comments are usually split as well, but I absolutely loathe how AI is used there. She means well, but the tools are so bad for this and so poorly explained. One random example of a before/after: https://imgur.com/a/WIAYLHm
•
I was looking for photos of NYC in the 1990s a few weeks ago. I eventually found some, but my search was greatly obstructed by AI photos of NYC in the 1990s. The experiance made me certain that AI is going to to much more harm than good to the buisness of archiving historical photos. As for the lady who is distorting photos to colorize them - I don't even understand why you would want to do that. There are other ways!
Rescuing old printers with an in-browser Linux VM bridged to WebUSB over USB/IP (printervention.app)
•
Too bad Apple is still preventing the WebUSB spec from being standardized. They won't even make suggestions to get it through committee because WebUSB might cut into their native app store.
•
Okay, this is reasonably genius. I have quite a few USB devices lying around that are either old enough or were niche enough that they don't work on modern _anything_, even Linux. One of them is a GameBoy Advance flash cartridge.
•
Oh, there's a thought - v86 supports lots of old DOS/Windows versions too, so assuming you could get the right port through (probably easy with anything USB, maybe possible with other things?) you could probably use your choice of old drivers:)
•
Isn't cups a de facto apple project? What's the VM getting you?
•
No. Most cups changes nowadays happen in https://github.com/openprinting/cups?tab=readme-ov-file See here for the details: https://openprinting.github.io/achievements/#cups-upstream-home-is-openprinting-now
•
The gutenprint drivers to support the specific printer don't support darwin
•
I have an old Epson MX80 dot-matrix printer in the closet, have thought about getting a Raspberry Pi and setting that up so we can wirelessly print to it. But... who would really want that?
•
Thank you, loved this and it made me "duh!". I have an old-ish Samsung laser printer that works perfectly and a Linux file server at home and the printer no longer supports AirPrint. I never thought about using the Linux box as an AirPrint server! This will free me from all the odd print requests from my kids! (probably)
If you are using an LLM, wouldn't it have been a lot easier to just have the LLM find the relevant CUPS driver decompile or just capture the USB traffic, and rewrite it in Go or something native? (No need to deal with the system printing framework, the goal was just an app that accepts JPEG input.)
•
Or ask the agent to write a Dockerfile (to abstract the build environment) that builds CUPS and all your stuff around it directl in WASM, instead of targeting x86 and then emulating x86 with WASM.
surely a glorious OS like osx would not be without support for hardware that linux supports? when will it be year of osx desktop?
•
wdym? OSX has literally always been supported only on very limited hardware so how would it support anything else?
GLM-5.1: Towards Long-Horizon Tasks (z.ai)
•
Share the harness for that browser linux OS task :)
•
The focus on the speed of the agent generated code as a measure of model quality is unusual and interesting. I've been focusing on intentionally benchmaxxing agentic projects (e.g. "create benchmarks, get a baseline, then make the benchmarks 1.4x faster or better without cheating the benchmarks or causing any regression in output quality") and Opus 4.6 does it very well: in Rust, it can find enough low-level optimizations to make already-fast Rust code up to 6x faster while still passing all tests. It's a fun way to quantify the real-world performance between models that's more practical and actionable.
GLM-5.0 is the real deal as far as open source models go. In our internal benchmarks it consistently outperforms other open source models, and was on par with things like GPT-5.2. Note that we don't use it for coding - we use it for more fuzzy tasks.
•
I am working on a large scale dataset for producing agent traces for Python <> cython conversion with tooling, and it is second only to gemini pro 3.1 in acceptance rates (16% vs 26%). Mid-sized models like gpt-oss minimax and qwen3.5 122b are around 6%, and gemma4 31b around 7% (but much slower). I haven’t tried Opus or ChatGPT due to high costs on openrouter for this application.
•
Yep, haven't tried 5.1 but for my PHP coding, GLM-5 is 99% the same as Sonnet/Opus/GPT-5 levels. It is unbelievably strong for what it costs, not to mention you can run it locally.
I find the "8 hour Linux Desktop" bit disingenuous, in the fine print it's a browser page: > "build a Linux-style desktop environment as a web application" They claim "50 applications from scratch", but "Browser" and a bunch of the other apps are likely all <iframe> elements. We all know that building a spec-compliant browser alone is a herculean task.
•
It is a big claim without the source and prompting.
Comments here seem to be talking like they've used this model for longer than a few hours -- is this true, or are y'all just sharing your initial thoughts?
•
My local tennis court's reservation website was broken and I couldn't cancel a reservation, and I asked GLM-5.1 if it can figure out the API. Five minutes later, I check and it had found a /cancel.php URL that accepted an ID but the ID wasn't exposed anywhere, so it found and was exploiting a blind SQL injection vulnerability to find my reservation ID. Overeager, but I was really really impressed.
•
Blog post is new but the model is about 2 weeks in public.
•
It's been out for a while.
How does it compare to Kimi 2.5 or Qwen 3.6 Plus?
•
The blog post has a benchmark comparison table with these two in it
To be honest I am a bit sad as, glm5.1 is producing mich better typescript than opus or codex imo, but no matter what it does sometimes go into shizo mode at some point over longer contexts. Not always tho I have had multiple session go over 200k and be fine.
•
I honestly still hold onto habits from earlier days of Claude & Codex usage and tend to wipe / compact my context frequently. I don't trust the era of big giant contexts, frankly, even on the frontier models.
Why is that sad? A free and open source model outperforming their closed source counterparts is always a win for the users
•
The non-awesome context window is the sad part, but I think a better harness can deal with this.
I am on their "Coding Lite" plan, which I got a lot of use out of for a few months, but it has been seriously gimped now. Obvious quantization issues, going in circles, flipping from X to !X, injecting chinese characters. It is useless now for any serious coding work.
•
Is there any advantage to their fixed payment plans at all vs just using this model via 3rd party providers via openrouter, given how relatively cheap they tend to be on a per-token basis? Providers like DeepInfra are already giving access to 5.1 https://deepinfra.com/zai-org/GLM-5.1 $1.40 in $4.40 out $0.26 cached / 1M tokens That's more expensive than other models, but not terrible, and will go down over time, and is far far cheaper than Opus or Sonnet or GPT. I haven't had any bad luck with DeepInfra in particular with quantization or rate limiting. But I've only heard bad things about people who used z.ai directly.
100k tokens it's basically nothing these days. Claude Opus 4.6M with 1M context windows is just a different ball game
•
The cost per message increases with context while quality decreases so it’s still generally good to practice strategic context engineering. Even with cross-repo changes on enterprise systems, it’s uncommon to need more than 100k (unless I’m using playwright mcp for testing).
•
I’m genuinely surprised. I use copilot at work which is capped at 128K regardless of model and it’s a monorepo. Admittedly I know our code base really well so I can point towards different things quickly directly but I don’t think I ever needed compacting more than a handful in the past year. Let alone 1M tokens.
•
Don’t want to disappoint you, but above 200k opus memory is like a gold fish. You need to be below 150k to get good research and implementation.
•
I had thought this, but my experience initially was that performance degradation began getting noticeable not long after crossing the old 250k barrier. So, it has been convenient to not have hard stops / allow for extra but I still try to /clear at an actual 25% of the 1M anyhow. This is in contrast to my use of the 1M opus model this past fall over the API, which seemed to perform more steadily.
It's an okay model. My biggest issue using GLM 5.1 in OpenCode is that it loses coherency over longer contexts. When you crest 128k tokens, there's a high chance that the model will start spouting gibberish until you compact the history. For short-term bugfixing and tweaks though, it does about what I'd expect from Sonnet for a pretty low price.
•
I wonder if running the compaction in a degraded state produces a subpar summary to continue with.
> "aside from totally going mad & speaking unpuncutaed gibberish [...] I trust it enormously." The bar is very low :(
•
I see where you are coming from. But I used 70m tokens yesterday on glm-5.1 (thanks glm for having good observability of your token usage unlike openai, dunno about anthropic). And got incredible beautiful results that I super trust. It's done amazing work. This limitation feels very shady and artificial to me, and i don't love this, but I also feel like I'm working somewhat effectively within the constraints. This does put a huge damper on people running more autonomous agentic systems, unless they have Pi or other systems that can more self adaptively improve the harness.
Z.ai Discord is filled to the brim with people experiencing capacity issues. I had to cancel my subscription with Z.ai because the service was totally unusable. Their Discord is a graveyard of failures. I switched to Alibaba Cloud for GLM but now they hiked their coding plan to $50 a month which is 2.5x more expensive than ChatGPT Plus. Totally insane.
•
Everyone has started either hiking their prices or limiting the tokens, gravy train is over. Glad we have open models that we can host; Sad RAM is so expensive..
Good Taste the Only Real Moat Left (rajnandan.com)
•
Does anyone remember this quote by Why the Lucky Stiff: “When you don't create things, you become defined by your tastes rather than ability.”
It is profoundly ironic that this article is AI generated.
•
Trying to bring my nose for AI up to standard -- care to share what you're smelling? For me it's: - Short, declarative sentences, stating grandiose yet vague claims, in a high school vocabulary: "Taste becomes useful when it moves from vibe to diagnosis." - Absence of references (let alone web links) to real-world examples. - Em-dashes, gone. No semicolons, but 23 full colons. As instructed by prompt?
Disagree with the overall argument. Human effort is still a moat. I've been spending the past couple of months creating a codebase that is almost entirely AI-generated. I've gotten way further than I would have otherwise at this pace, but it was still a lot of effort, and I still wasted time going down rabbit holes on features that didn't work out. There's some truth in there that judgement is as important as ever, though I'm not sure I'd call it taste. I'm finding that you have to have an extremely clear product vision, along with an extremely clear language used to describe that product, for AI to be used effectively. Know your terms, know how you want your features to be split up into modules, know what you want the interfaces of those modules to be. Without the above, you run into the same issue devs would run into before AI - the codebase becomes an incoherent mess, and even AI can't untangle it because the confusion gets embedded into its own context.
•
Isn't this a temporary situation though. Today: Ask AI to "do the thing", manual review because don't trust the AI Tomorrow: Ask AI to "do the thing" I'm just getting started on my AI journey. It didn't take long before I upgraded from the $17 a month claude plan to the $100 a month plan and I can see myself picking the $200 a month plan soon. This is for hobby projects. At the moment I'm reviewing most of the code for what I'm working on, and I have tests and review those too. But, seeing how good it is (sometimes), I can imagine a future where the AI itself has both the tech chops and the taste and I can just say "Maybe me an app to edit photos" and it will spit out a user friendly clone of photoshop with good UX. We already kind of see this with music - it's able to spit out "Bangers". How long until it can spit out hit rom-coms, crime shows, recipes, apps? I don't think the answer is "never". I think more likely the answer is in N years where N is probably a single digit.
•
No, I don't think it is temporary. As AI becomes more powerful, we'll simply ask it to do more difficult things. There's a level of complexity where "do the thing" is insufficient. We'll never be at a place where AI can infer vast amounts of nuance from simple human requests, which means that humans will always need to be able to describe precisely what they want. This has always been the core skill for software developers, and I just don't see that changing.
•
> We already kind of see this with music - it's able to spit out "Bangers" “Bangers” being roughly equivalent to garbage mass marketed radio pop? Or “We are Charlie Kirk” lol
> This is why I say that having a super clear vision up front is important, because it reduces this kind of directional churn. I'm on my 6th or 7th draft of a project. I've been picking away at this thing since the end of January; I keep restarting because the core abstractions get clearer and clearer as I go. AI has been great in this discovery process because it speeds iteration much more quickly. I know its starting to drift into a mess when I no longer have a clear grasp of the work its doing. To me, this indicates that some mental model I had and communicated was not sufficiently precise.
•
Yep, for sure. Restarting is the right choice IMO, it's way easier than trying to untangle from a previous iteration.
do you need taste if you can massively parallel a/b test your way to something that is tasteful? say like you take your datacenter of geniuses and have a a rubin-loop supervising testing different directions. shouldn't that be close enough?
•
"taste" here is an intractable solution. Just take a look at how architecture has varied throughout the history of mankind, building materials, assembly, shape, flow, all of it boils down to taste. Some of it can be reduced to 'efficiency' -- like the 3 point system for designing kitchens, but even that is a matter of taste. Find three professional chefs and they will give you three distinct visions for how a kitchen should be organized. The same goes for any professional field, including software engineering.
Ah, the classic "we'll ship production to China and just do design and marketing in US, because we have taste on what to build, and China doesn't". That worked really well...
•
If you replace "China" with some other countries with large offshore engineering centres, your statement would still hold true today. China managed to copy, improve, and localise for their Chinese-reading market, then oust competition through good use of the Great Firewall (though I wonder if that specifically was an unintended consequence). Many other countries, especially the English-speaking ones that don't have a great firewall to keep their market buying locally, still need to compete with US tech giants for "taste".
> One of the most useful things about AI is also one of the most humbling: it reveals how clear your own judgment actually is. If your critique stays vague, your taste is still underdeveloped. If your critique becomes precise, your judgment is stronger than the model output. You can then use the model well instead of being led by it. Something I find that teams get wrong with agentic coding: they start by reverse engineering docs from an existing codebase. This is a mistake. Instead, the right train of thought is: "what would perfect code look like?" and then meticulously describe to the LLM what "perfect" is to shape every line that gets generated. This exercise is hard for some folks to grasp because they've never thought much about what well-constructed code or architectures looks like; they have no "taste" and thus no ability to precisely dictate the framework for "perfect" (yes, there is some subjectivity that reflects taste).
•
> Instead, the right train of thought is: "what would perfect code look like?" and then meticulously describe to the LLM what "perfect" is to shape every line that gets generated. I don't think there's perfect code. Code is automation - it automates human effort and humans themselves have error, hence not perfect. So as long as code meets or exceeds the human output, it's "good enough" and meets expectations. That's what a typical customer cares about. A customer will happily choose a tent made of tarp and plastic sticks that's available at their budget, right now when it's raining outside, over an architectural marvel that will be available sometime in the future at some unknown pricepoint. Put another way, I don't think if you built CharlieAI CharlieGPT today , where the only differentiating factor over ChatGPT was that CharlieGPT was written using perfect code , you would have any meaningful edge. I am yet to see any evidence where everything else being equal, one company had an edge over another simply due to superior code. Infact, I have overwhelming evidence of companies that had better code succumb and vanish against companies that had very little, if any code, because those dollars were instead invested in better customer discovery, segmentation and analytics ("what should we build?", "if we did one thing that would give our customers an unfair advantage, what would be that thing?") Software history is full of perfect OS, editors, frameworks, protocols that is lost over time because a provably inferior option won marketshare. You are using a software controlled SMPS to power your device right now. You have 0 idea what the quality of that code is. All you care about is whether that SMPS drains your battery prematurely and heats up your device unnecessarily. It's extremely unlikely that such an efficient, low overhead control system was written using well abstracted modules. It's more likely that control system is full of gotos and repeated violations of DRY that would make a perfectionist shudder and cry.
•
> I don't think there's perfect code Note I used "perfect" in my text. In this context, meaning it passes human PR reviews following our standard guidelines with minimal feedback/correction required. > So as long as code meets or exceeds the human output, it's "good enough" and meets expectations. That's what a typical customer cares about. Why settle for this when "perfect" is "free"? You only need to accurately describe what "perfect" is to the LLM instead of allowing it to regress to the mean of its training set. There really is no cost difference between writing shitty code and "perfect" code now; its just a matter of how good you are at describing "perfect" to the LLM.
It does amaze me when colleagues refuse to read what I (personally, deliberately) wrote (they ask AI to summarize), but then tell AI to write their response and it's absolutely bloated and full of misconceptions around my original document. If they aren't willing to read what I put effort into, why should I be expected to read the ill-conceived and verbose response? I really don't want to get into a match of my AI arguing with your AI, but that's what they've told me I should be doing...
•
I've been having ongoing issues with a manager who responds in the form of Claude guided PRs. Undoubtedly driven from confused prompts. Always full of issues, never actually solving the problem, always adding HEAPS of additional nonsense in the process. There's an asymmetry of effort in the above, and when combined with the power asymmetry - that's a really bad combo, and I don't think I'm alone. I'm glad to see the appreciation of the enormous costs of complexity on this forum, but I don't think that has ascended to the managerial level.
•
> ...a manager who responds in the form of Claude guided PRs I think the job of a dev in this coming era is to produce the systems by which non-engineers can build competently and not break prod or produce unmaintainable code. In my current role, I have shifted from lead IC to building the system that is used by other IC's and non-IC's. From my perspective, if I can provide the right guardrails to the agent, then anyone using any agent will produce code that is going to coalesce around a higher baseline of quality. Most of my IC work now is aligned on this directionality.
The joke is that "taste" usually implies you have some strong personal sense of self and style, but if you walked into tech offices in the bay area everyone looks like that and acts/talks the same. So its ironic that these same people are talking about "taste" when they ostensibly have very little.
•
That seems a bit judgy though, no? As if you can tell about a person's internal sense of taste by their business-casual clothing choices? I mean, some of those people undoubtedly like Rush ... make of that what you will.
The joke is that the person "saying" this is wearing their "I'm a rational, independent thinker!" tech uniform (expensive Nordic outdoors wear, so practical, so smart, so active, Vimes' boot theory, et c, not like those clowns in business wear, I'm interested in practicality not signaling, that's why I'm spending so much money signaling so hard about how rational I am). They are visibly displaying a complete lack of personal taste, instead wearing the SV equivalent of an outdated-cut, off-the-rack navy blue (or even black, LOL) business suit. The joke is that the message "good taste is what matters now" is being delivered by someone apparently, in a specifically SV sort of way, with a deficit of good taste.
•
Agree but arcteryx is from vancouver
•
Gah, you're right of course. I was thinking of Fjällräven in particular (not that that's the only one) and got it mixed up.
What's evergreen about it?
•
It's an Americanism that means 'it's always green' or 'always relevant'.
12k Tons of Dumped Orange Peel Grew into a Landscape Nobody Expected (2017) (sciencealert.com)
•
The whole compost thing can be a lot of hassle for people. For a simpler option, if you are lucky enough to have a decent garden area, find somewhere away from your house and just throw biomass there regularly. Coffee grinds, spent tea, leftover veg, etc. and watch what happens! Sometimes simple is best.
> Despite this promising start, the conservation experiment wasn't to last, after a rival juice manufacturer called TicoFruit sued Del Oro, alleging that its competitor had "defiled a national park". No good deed goes unpunished--wild that the competitor company successfully sued them.
•
Maybe they can now overturn that judgement
Often you don't even need seeds from neighboring land. The soil that remains often still has seeds sitting dormant waiting for conditions to return to healthy.
•
Reading this feels like a great metaphor to life that I am unable to explain but I will still try, in the sense that, within a degraded land with just the right conditions, it is just waiting to grow :D
life's too short for friends like that
•
It's apparently long enough for me to see the same orange peel in the same place over a year or two.
I worked for a time designing and building landfills. Nothing really rots in them typically as it’s really dry and don’t have good access to oxygen. Modern landfills are like giant plastic bags. This is to protect ground water. Decomposition as noted releases methane. Some landfills gather it in pipes and “flare” it )burn. They have to vent the gas as a full landfill is covered by a plastic cap to prevent water infiltration. We dug up trash from the 70s to extend the landfill out. It was in remarkably good shape. https://planetliner.com/landfill-cap/
•
Thanks for the share, crazy that 1-2mm polyethylene is all it takes to cap a landfill. Practical Engineering put out an excellent video on landfills a couple years back, well worth the watch for the visualizations alone. https://youtu.be/HRx_dZawN44
Proud to report residential composting is now mandatory in NYC.
•
Please elaborate. From what i know based on prior research, most metro (including NYC) recycling is effectively a scam. How do you mandate composting in NYC ? Are you implying that all buildings have now must build a 3rd chute specifically for compost ? And who's picking up that compost ? NYC Trash collection ? I've seen compost vending machines in my visits to NYC and a few other places, but i've yet anyone using them
Claude Code is locking people out for hours (github.com/anthropics)
As much as people on Hacker News complain about subscription models for productivity and creativity suites, the open arms embrace of subscription development tools (services, really) which seek to offload the very act itself makes me wonder how and why so many people are eager to dive right in. I get it. LLMs are cool technology. Is this a symptom of the same phenomenon behind the deluge of disposable JavaScript frameworks of just ten years ago? Is it peer pressure, fear of missing out? At its root, I suspect so; of course I would imagine it's rare for the C-suite to have ever mandated the usage of a specific language or framework, and LLMs represent an unprecedented lever of power to have an even bigger shot at first mover's advantage, from a business perspective. (Yes, I am aware of how "good enough" local models have become for many.) I don't really have anything useful nor actionable to say here regarding this dialling back of capability to deal with capacity issues. Are there any indications of shops or individual contributors with contingency plans on the table for dialling back LLM usage in kind to mitigate these unknowns? I know the calculus is such that potential (and frequently realised) gains heavily outweigh the risks of going all in, but, in the grander scheme of time and circumstance, long term commitments are starting to be more apparently risky. I am purposefully trying to avoid "begging the question" here; if instead of LLMs, this were some other tool or service, reactions to these events would have been far more pragmatic, with less of a reticence to invest time on in-house solutions when dealing with flaky vendors.
•
> the open arms embrace of subscription development tools (services, really) which seek to offload the very act itself makes me wonder how and why so many people are eager to dive right in Here's a reason not in your list. Short version: A kind of peer pressure, but from above. In some circles I'm told a developer must have AI skills on their resume now, and those probably need to be with well known subscription services, or they substantially reduce their employment prospects. Multiple people I know who are employers have recently, without prompting, told me they no longer hire developers who don't use AI in their workflow. One of them told me all the employers they know think "seniors" fall into two camps, those who are embracing AI and therefore nimble and adaptive, and those who are avoiding it and therefore too backward-looking, stuck-in-their-ways to be a good hire for the future. So if they don't see signs of AI usage on a senior dev's resume now, that's an automatic discard. For devs I know laid off from an R&D company where AI was not permitted for development (for IP/confidentiality reasons), that's unfair as they were certainly not backward-looking people, but the market is not fair. Another "business leader" employer I met recently told me his devs are divided into those who are embracing AI and those who aren't, said he finds software feature development "so slow!", and said if it wasn't for employment law he'd fire all his devs who aren't choosing to use AI. I assume he was joking, but it was interesting to hear it said out loud without prompting. I've been to several business leadership type meetups in recent months, and it seems to be simply assumed that everyone is using AI for almost everything worth talking about. I don't think they really are, so it's interesting to watch that narrative playing out.
> stupid amounts for takeout Aw hell. You found my vice and my own cognitive dissonance here. If I want to truly stand by my convictions, I should probably cook more and log off. Waiting for signs that the tides are turning and that people are beginning to value a slower, more methodical approach again isn't doing anything in the current moment to stave off the genuine feelings of dread that have honestly led to some suicidal ideation. (this is serious and not sarcasm, by the way)
•
Think that you're likely average! By which I mean, it's likely you're not the only one feeling that dread. We're due for a counter movement, and it's a matter of time to see it flower.
Stand strong. Plenty of us working towards healthy offline communities.
•
Thanks friend. I really appreciate that. This is genuinely hard right now.
I think most people understand the need for subscriptions here. It is an ongoing massive compute cost, and that’s what you’re paying for. Your local system is not capable of running the massive amount of compute required for this. If it were then we would see more people up in arms about it.
•
Is this pace necessary? I feel like this is causing people to consider code to be disposable, and I think that both are a massive mistake.
I use Claude Code a lot, but I don't understand these "I'm doing 10X the work" comments. I spend a lot of time reviewing any code that comes out of Claude Code. Even using Opus 4.6 with max effort there is almost always something that needs to be changed, often dramatically. I can see how people go down the path of thinking "Wow, this code compiles and passes my tests! Ship it!" and start handing trust over to Opus, but I've already seen what this turns into 6 months down the road: Projects get mired down in so much complexity and LLM spaghetti that the codebase becomes fragile. Everyone is sidetracked restructuring messy code from the past, then fighting bugs that appear in the change. I can believe some of the more recent studies showing LLMs can accelerate work by circa 20% (1.2X) because that's on the same order of magnitude that I and others are seeing with careful use. When someone comes out and claims 10X more output, I simply cannot believe they're doing careful engineering work instead of just shipping the output after a cursory glance.
•
I find that it's relative to the amount of planning time you spend... I feel like I've gotten around 5x the output while using Claude Code w/ Opus over what I will get done myself... That said, I'm probably spending about 3x as much time planning as I would when just straight coding for/by myself. And that's generally the difference. I can use the agent to scaffold a lot of test/demo frameworks around the pieces I'm working on pretty cleanly and have the agent fill in. I still spend a lot of time validating the tests and the code being completed though. The errors I tend to get from the agent are roughly similar to what I might see from a developer/team that works remotely... you still need to verify. The difference is the turn around seems to be minutes over days. You're also able to observe over simply review... When I see a bad path, I can usually abort/cancel, revert back to the last commit and try again with more planning.
So what do I do differently then? Hypothetically, you have a simple slice out of bounds error because a function is getting an empty string so it does something like: `""[5]`. Opus will add a bunch of length & nil checks to "fix" this, but the actual issue is the string should never be empty. The nil checks are just papering over a deeper issue, like you probably need a schema level check for minimum string length. At that point do you just tell it like "no delete all that, the string should never be empty" and let it figure that out, or do I basically need to pseudo code "add a check for empty strings to this file on line 145", or do I just YOLO and know the issue is gone now so it is no longer my problem? My bigger point is how does an LLM know that this seemingly small problem is indicative of some larger failure, like lets say this string is a `user.username` which means users can set their name to empty which means an entire migration is probably necessary. All the AI is going to do is smoosh the error messages and kick the can.
•
Always start an implementation in Claude Code plan mode. It's much more comprehensive than going straight to impl. I never read their prompt for plan mode before, but it deep-dives the code, peripheral files, callsites, documentation, existing tests, etc. You get a better solution but also a plan file that you can review. And, also important, have another agent review. I've found that Codex is really good at reviewing plans. I have an AGENTS.md prompt that explains that plan file review involves ranking the top findings by severity, explaining the impact, and recommending a fix to each one. And finally recommend a simpler directional pivot if one exists for the plan. So, start the plan in Claude Code, type "Review this plan: <path>" in Codex (or another Claude Code agent), and cycle the findings back into Claude Code to refine the plan. When the plan is updated, write "Plan updated" to the reviewer agent. You should get much better results with this capable of much better arch-level changes rather than narrow topical solutions. If that's still not working sufficiently for you, maybe you could use more support, like a type-system and more goals in AGENTS.md?
1. I'm working in Rust, so it's a very safe and low-defect language. I suspect that has a tremendous amount to do with my successes. "nulls" (Option<T>) and "errors" (Result<T,E>) must be handled, and the AST encodes a tremendous amount about the state, flow, and how to deal with things. I do not feel as comfortable with Claude Code's TypeScript and React outputs - they do work, but it can be much more imprecise. And I only trust it with greenfield Python, editing existing Python code has been sloppy. The Rust experience is downright magical. 2. I architecturally describe every change I want made. I don't leave it up to the LLM to guess. My prompts might be overkill, but they result in 70-80ish% correctness in one shot. (I haven't measured this, and I'm actually curious.) I'll paste in file paths, method names, struct definitions and ask Claude for concrete changes. I'll expand "plumb foo field through the query and API layers" into as much detail as necessary. My prompts can be several paragraphs in length. 3. I don't attempt an entire change set or PR with a single prompt. I work iteratively as I would naturally work, just at a higher level and with greater and broader scope. You get a sense of what granularity and scope Claude can be effective at after a while. You can't one shot stuff. You have to work iteratively. A single PR might be multiple round trips of incremental change. It's like being a "film director" or "pair programmer" writing code. I have exacting specifications and directions. The power is in how fast these changes can be made and how closely they map to your expectations. And also in how little it drains your energy and focus. This also gives me a chance to code review at every change, which means by the time I review the final PR, I've read the change set multiple times.
•
I hope you're not 100% serious. Otherwise you should switch to haskal since it makes logic errors and bugs mathematically impossible.
Cloudflare targets 2029 for full post-quantum security (blog.cloudflare.com)
•
Along similar lines, Mozilla recently updated their recommended server-side TLS configuration to enable the X25519MLKEM768 post-quantum key exchange now that it's making into actually-deployed software versions: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/Server_Side_TLS At the same time they removed their "old client" compatibility profile as newer TLS libraries do not implement the necessary algorithms (or at least do not enable them by default) and slightly tweaked the "intermediate" compatibility profile to remove a fallback necessary for IE 11 on Windows 7 (now Windows 10 is the minimum compatible version for that profile).
If any kind of proof about serious quantum computers comes to light, browsers can force most websites' hand by marking non-PQ ciphers as insecure. Maybe it'll require TLS 1.4/QUIC 2, with no changes but the cipher specifications, but it can happen in two or three years. Certificates themselves don't last longer than a year anyway. Corporations running ancient software that doesn't support PQ TLS will have the same configuration options to ignore the security warnings already present for TLS 1.0/plain HTTP connections. The biggest problem I can imagine is devices talking to the internet no longer receiving firmware updates. If the web host switches protocols, the old clients will start dying off en masses.
•
There is no reason to not support non quantum safe algorithms for foreseeable future in the first place
It's theory. The concern is for avoiding a (likely, IMO) scenario where the only real indication that someone cracked QC is one or more teams of researchers in the field going dark because they got pulled into some tight-lipped NSA project. If we wait until we have an unambiguous path to QC, it might well be too late. To avoid the scenario where for a prolonged period of time the intelligence community has secret access to QC, researchers against that type of thing are incentivized to shout fire when they see the glimmerings of a possibly productive path of research.
•
> one or more teams of researchers in the field going dark If the intelligence community is going to nab the first team that has a quantum computing breakthrough, does it actually help the public to speed up research? It seems like an arms race the public is destined to lose because the winning team will be subsumed no matter what.
This?: https://nsa.gov1.info/utah-data-center/
•
FYI this is a parody website. (in case it's not obvious)
You can't cancel a JavaScript promise (except sometimes you can) (inngest.com)
•
Is it safe to just "stop calling next() on a generator?" like the post suggest? To me that sounds like dropping the task on the floor. Specifically, this will not invoke any finally {} blocks: More correctly, you should invoke `return()` on the generator. Otherwise, you won't provide execution guarantees. This is how Effection does it. There is no equivalent in async functions, so it sounds like the same problem would apply to the GC technique.
I soft of feel like every five years someone comes along and tries to re-invent cancellable threads and immediately arrives back at the same conclusion: the problem of what it means to "cancel" a thread is so domain-specific that you never save anything trying to "support" it in your threading framework; you try and save people the effort of doing something ad-hoc to simulate cancellation and build something at least as complicated as what they would build ad-hoc, because thread cancellation is too intimately tied to the problem domain the threads are operating on to generalize it.
•
But what if we add another layer of indirection.
> ...constantly manage the lifecycle of cancellation sources Very rare unless you are spawning your own. Usually, you are passing through a runtime provided token (e.g. ASP.NET).
•
Not that rare in my experience, I constantly had to write software like this. Not every day, but it certainly did come up quite often in my code and others' Oh and oone more thing - the very (developer-managed) complexity makes it that people constantly got it wrong, usually just enough (as often with the case of threading) that it worked fine 90% of the time, and was very hard to make a case to management why we should invest effort into fixing it.
I am surprised that you had to go out of your way to remove Thread.stop from existing Java code. It's been deprecated since 1998, and the javadoc page explains pretty clearly why it's inherently unsafe. It's hard to miss all the warnings unless you're literally just looking at the method name and nothing else.
•
Not to mention that I feel like it's pretty unusual to be creating and managing threads yourself in Java these days, instead of using a thread pool/executor.
•
One of Java's the ecosystem fundamental platforms is that it's multi-threading. It's gone through too many models. And since Java has a metric ton of blog posts from the 2000s and 2010s, a lot of search engines lead you to older models.java itself has gone from green threads to OS threads and back to green threads now.
TC39 seems to be failing at many things for the past 10 years.
•
Hard disagree, TC39 has done great work over the last 10 years. To name a few: - Async/await - Rest/spread - Async iterators - WeakRefs - Explicit Resource Management - Temporal It's decisions are much more well thought out than WHATWG standards. AbortSignal extending from EventTarget was a terrible call.
Dropping Cloudflare for Bunny.net (jola.dev)
The platform yes, but the runtime and the APIs are apache 2.0 licensed and uses web standards wherever possible. Thats way more open than most alternatives i am aware of.
•
Their fetch handler [1] is not a web standard. [1] https://developers.cloudflare.com/workers/runtime-apis/handlers/fetch/
Unless the project is controlled by democratic committee where cloudflare doesn't have a majority of seats it's not open source in any meaningful sense of the word, maybe we should stop acting like corporate sourced software is anything but an attempt to get free labor from the commons.
•
> maybe we should stop acting like corporate sourced software is anything but an attempt to get free labor from the commons The point of this discussion is that you can self-host, and you have a good chance of migrating the code away entirely. That's a big benefit that isn't "an attempt to get free labor". For that use, not only does it not matter if it's meaningfully open source, it doesn't matter if it's open source at all.
Because an edge runtime should not directly start servers in the first place. You provide handlers that fulfil requests from the system. Edge runtimes that pretend to start the servers in the edge worker context are flawed and ugly from the very start. APIs like that leak implementation details and increase vendor lock-in for no added benefit.
•
> > I don't understand how none of the alternatives really embrace WinterTC > You provide handlers that fulfil requests from the system. As I said previously, though I wish they were, such handlers are not part of WinterTC. And then again, how those handlers are registered is also not part of WinterTC, which I also wish it were. > APIs like that leak implementation details How? Almost all runtimes, like Bunny Edge Scripting, Cloudflare Workers, Deno, Bun, etc. use the same basic signature for the handler: (request: Request) => Promise<Response> Only how you register said handler is, unfortunately, different for each runtime.
For personal projects, I'd rather just pay $2/month and not think about it than get hit with a random bill and scramble to migrate before the next month's bill. Bunny is perfect for this use case where you have a handful of projects that aren't all actively maintained. It just works without hand-holding, and since you're paying for the service, there's no rugpull looming.
•
Don't you still have to worry about big bills since bunny bills based on usage?
•
The biggest bill I've gotten from Bunny was like $10 when my app ( https://atlasof.space ) briefly went viral and got 100k+ views in a month. Bunny CDN is so reasonably priced and the realistic visitor ceiling for my projects is low enough that it's still negligible. The free->paid cliff is typically a lot steeper than this in my experience.
It's impossible to generalize over free vs paid in regard to predictability. E.g. a provider I paid for simply disappeared once when I was quite busy while my old free gmail still works. Realistically CF's free tier is more predictable than many paid options on market.
•
My threat model here focuses on what the provider gets out of the free tier. Cloudflare gets a broad view into activity on the internet for building the models they use for their paid offerings. Free Gmail puts people on a path in to Google's ecosystem with basically zero marginal cost.
Sorry, I realize I overdid it on the affiliate links so I've called out the link and removed some others. Just thought it was nice that they had an affiliate program. Nothing shady intended!
•
Thanks for the update. The usage of an affiliate link feels quite dishonest here because the hyperlink says bunny.net but then opens up bunny.net/?ref=xxxx
A Fire Sale Has U.S. Office Buildings Going for 90% Off (wsj.com)
The lower-friction result is that the offices become huge apartment buildings with reverse-commutes to the suburbs, hoping the "stuff to walk to" survives. There are issues with that too, like plumbing and windows.
•
most of those issues will be very expensive or insurmountable for most high-rises -- a non-starter you're basically rebuilding from scratch at that point.
When I travel around the US, vacant storefronts and empty commercial buildings are a constant, not just office buildings, and not just in certain places.
•
I tried going out to shops again to buy things recently - its so much harder, more expensive and time consuming than having it arrive through my letterbox the next day.
•
Look into US retail space per capita. It has far exceeded other nations for some time. Some retail store CEOs have directly discussed too much supply.
I literally just built a house for ~$60k a couple years ago. A burned out trailer even in a rural shithole with no jobs in my state is about $100k+. An actual functional house, $250k+. This is counter-intuitive but it makes sense in context of the recent COVID 0 real interest mania. Meanwhile all the shithole land with no "dwelling" on it was never eligible for mortgages so people weren't able to bid it up to oblivion on debt that they locked in with 30 year mortgages so you get weird results like the cost of vacant land is way cheaper than the same piece of land with a house that can really only be bulldozed (latter would be cheaper in most times in history). End result is I built an entire house on property cheaper than a burned out uninhabitable trailer. Building on unmortgagable land is a way to bypass the fact houses are all locked up in 30 year loans at negative real interest rates. End result is it's far cheaper to build a house than buy even a shitty burned out one because to do the latter you have to buy someone out of their money printing machine of a negative real rate loan, which obviously they are only willing to do for a king's ransom.
•
show us where this is. give me a google map coordinate. and then show me where the jobs are.
If I understood you correctly, land that has no building on it is not eligible for a mortgage, and is therefore cheaper to buy? With the downside that you have to pay cash, because you can't get a mortgage either?
•
Yes the land value is so insanely cheaper on un-mortgagable properties in my state, it's off the charts. I have developed land in my county so I'm familiar with the costs to develop, buy land, place utilities etc. (I did not become a land developer on purpose, only because I realized this absolutely crazy arbitrage) It would cost you about $200-$250k to buy a rural small acreage land with a manufactured home on it. If you pay cash for the land and drop the exact same manufactured home on it, it would only cost you about $150k, and you would get a brand new house instead of a "used" one. There is huge pent up demand for someone to just buy a huge swath of small acreage properties and just drop the cheapest manufactured home you could on it as the non-luxury starter home market is currently not being met. You could pretty much double your money. I'm not sure why this isn't being done en masse although a few private actors seem to be doing it and making a killing.
Commercial buildings can't be easily converted into housing that provides the same return. Once the current owners have gone out of business it'll be profitable to turn them into flats. The arguments against conversion assume you care about the current owner's financial situation.
•
It's not so much the owner's financial situation, but rather that it'd be cheaper to build new homes than to retrofit a ten floor+ building's plumbing. You'd also have to install a bunch of showers, which could be a significant problem on its own. And then there's the increased amount of sewage, which the building might not be able to handle - even the local sewers might not be equipped to handle the uh... Load a large commercial building would generate with 24/7 occupancy vs 8/5 occupancy. The reason you don't see folks converting commercial spaces into residential isn't because it's not wildly profitable, but because building new purpose-built residential buildings would be cheaper than a conversion for anything other than one or two floors.
•
Oh no, I live in a flat in a converted commercial building. They have been going wild in the UK converting office space to residential.
This is historically incomplete. American cities were replete with dorm room style housing. These were especially popular with new migrants to the city. An incredibly large percentage of apartments in cities like NYC are used as multi family housing with several housemates sharing them to save on rent. The reality is that the reason such housing doesn’t exist/isn’t more widespread is because cities have passed laws eliminating them. Before the white flight to the suburbs, the attempt was to keep the poor out of cities where the rich lived by eliminating housing of this sort since the poor couldn’t afford single family housing. This led to a proliferation of laws that required bathrooms and kitchens in every unit, etc.
•
It's easy to live in shareable spaces when you're young and unattached - it becomes a lot more difficult as you age and want to grow a family. I'm not sure I want the kind of life where I have to share a kitchen or a bathroom, spaces I consider very private, with people I'm not related to. Maybe this is a uniquely midwestern/American sentiment, I'm not sure. But I am confident that there are more people like me than there aren't. The picture of the American dream is familiar, it's a house with a car in the driveway. I feel that may just be who we are now, regardless of any way we used to be.
Studio apartments seem like a better option. Also, from a property manager’s perspective, you generally want to minimize shared spaces because they’re a pain and annoying to deal with.
•
I was responding to your argument that no one wants to live like that.
What will distinguish these structures from slums in 10 or 20 years?
•
unless you're an owner and control the means of production anywhere you live will be a slum in ~20 years
Trump says 'a whole civilization will die tonight' if Iran does not make a deal (reuters.com)
•
Hey Americans this might be a good time to do something about that lunatic you put into office. You're the ones constantly bleating on about keeping government power in check, don't you think this is an opportunity to put your money where your mouth is? The world is watching, and judging.
Either way, we won't be talking about it on HN, this got flagged so hard it is on page 4. We don't do politics. By the way, here is some new nonsense built with an LLM.
•
Whoa whoa there Jacques, We talk about politics about here all the time. 'Uh, what kind of politics do you usually have here?' 'Oh we got both kinds -- Bay area zoning and Bay area homelessness.' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS-zEH8YmiM
If you’re a doctor? You have not killed the person, you let them die in peace, if you want to continue the reductio ad absurdum? Or if you put CO2 in the atmosphere you are contributing to toxicity and global warming? We don’t know which infrastructure he wants to attack, and even if people do die, that is still not genocide. Genocide is very clear intent to destroy a people. Destroying infrastructure, or any war, is serious enough as is, we don’t need to fake arguments here.
•
> Destroying infrastructure, or any war "Destroying infrastructure" isn't the same as "any war", that wording is ridiculous. Destroying infrastructure on a massive scale (let's say > 50%), IS genocide. Any war? It depends. More importantly, what is this demand for "Iran to make a deal"? It takes two parties to make a deal, not only one. When one party has to accept the deal under the threat of genocide, that's not a deal, it's enslavement. Besides, deal making depends on the conditions of the deal, but in this case, nobody knows what they are or when they are going to change yet again. Iran had agreed to multiple deals before only to be bombed "for not making more deals". If more deals means more bombing, what's the point of them?
After Israel, Iran is home to the second largest Jewish population in the Middle East. Current estimates are that 15,000 to 20,000 Jews live in Iran. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Jews
•
Tehran to this day hosts Dr. Sapir Hospital and Charity Center, a Jewish charity hospital, the largest charity among the religious minorities in Iran. Ayatollah Khomeini himself wrote a personal note thanking the hospital for its help after the revolution succeeded. https://www.csmonitor.com/1998/0203/020398.intl.intl.3.html """ It comes as a surprise to many visitors to discover that Iran, a country so hostile to Israel and with a reputation for intolerance, is home to a small but vibrant Jewish community that is an officially recognized religious minority under Iran's 1979 Islamic Constitution. "Khomeini didn't mix up our community with Israel and Zionism - he saw us as Iranians," says Haroun Yashyaei, a film producer and chairman of the Central Jewish Community in Iran.""" Iran's objection is not with Judaism but with the occupation and the meddling in their affairs through proxies.
At this rate, if the official religion of USA was a different one, they would be categorized as a terrorist state
•
It's not about definitions or categorisations. It's about what reprisals there are for labelling them a terrorist state.
The US stopped individual wars. They went on to attack somebody else, but the host of the previous war was happy to see it over. That's why they negotiated a peace treaty, and the US mostly respected that. (Except with the native Americans.) There is nothing to stop the next guy from changing his mind, but it generally doesn't happen. It certainly could, and yeah, there's a really strong case that with the current administration the US has gone completely off the rails. My last comment was speaking generally about civilized countries. It doesn't account for rogue states, and the US is increasingly fitting that definition. Can a rogue state commit terrorism by my definition? Not with a uniformed army. That's another part of my definition of terrorism: it puts civilians in jeopardy by hiding its combatants among them. Uniformed soldiers are legitimate targets, which means it's possible to fight back only against legitimate targets, even if those legitimate targets are committing acts that would otherwise be terrorism. I don't think targeting civilians is a sufficient definition for terrorism, because militaries have been doing that since forever. It's basically part of war, even if we wish to pretend otherwise.
•
> The US stopped individual wars. They went on to attack somebody else, but the host of the previous war was happy to see it over. Right, until they come back and attack again though. USA has invaded several countries multiple times including Iraq, Haiti, DR, Cuba, Panama, Nicaragua... Seems to me "terrorist" is just something states call the warriors of the people they themselves are terrorizing. Frankly, the current administration is just recycling the propaganda and playbook of the bloodthirsty Neocons, so I don't see how this current administration is an aberration.
Always remember that we got here because Zionists bought off our politicians and media (sometimes both together, like in TikTok) so that an attack on Iran by the US would have been guaranteed.
•
You got here because you elected Donald J Trump, twice.
Show HN: Stop paying for Dropbox/Google Drive, use your own S3 bucket instead (locker.dev)
•
If you are not ready to trust a vibe-coded app with all your digital life, I recommend Filestash[1], easy to install self-hosted frontend for virtually any type of storage. Written in Go, it can be enhanced with plugins. Uses local SQLite database. I am using it with Hetzner Storage Box[2], which is insane value for money at 11 euro per 5 terabytes per month. [1]: https://github.com/mickael-kerjean/filestash [2]: https://www.hetzner.com/storage/storage-box/
not picking on you, specifically, but i wonder how many people could roughly draw a cardboard box template correctly. It is an easier object than a bicycle, which people routinely have issues drawing, too. generally, there's not "missing pieces" in a cardboard box.
•
Fair, that template resolves to a box but it's missing stuff like tabs to make the bottom properly stick ; and it's probably not optimal in its use of cardboard. Also it was design in a minute in draw.io to make a stranger on the internet chuckle, so lots of constraints to fulfill.
A family member has uploaded a backup of all of the family photos to Amazon Glacial Storage, on the order of a few hundred GB, and gleefully sends me screenshots of the <$1/mo charges.
•
And then has to pay hundreds to get the data back
On the other hand when a Dropbox user shares a file with you these days, the nudges have so gotten out of hand that it's a pain to use.
•
[delayed]
Show HN: Brutalist Concrete Laptop Stand (2024) (sam-burns.com)
•
This is pretty cool. How much does this weigh?
•
Use a Keychron concrete keyboard with it .
So many naysayers. I love it! So what if it doesn’t come from the Brut region of France and thus it’s just sparkling cement, it looks great and is clearly a labor of love.
•
Thank you!
This is the kind of content that I come to HN for. Well done, OP. I love the product and inspiration.
•
Thank you!
Same method though. There's a plethora of vibrating things to choose from. I suppose you could mold a large silicone tentacle to put on a jackhammer, too, and use that to fish for bubbles in your cement soup. Call the tool what you want, you haven't changed the method.
•
Are you guys all trying hard not to say the words dildo, satisfier, or sex toy? Why so? AFAIK it is neither a rude nor a prohibited word.
 Top