Unlurker|Replay|About
I audited the privacy of popular free dev tools, the results are terrifying (toolbox-kit.com)
•
what dev uses public websites to do any kind of work?
•
> Free Dev Tools And test only online websites (」°ロ°)」
•
Glad that I am using Firefox with: - uBlock Origin - cookieAutodelete - privacy badger Any additions to my arsenal welcome!
A US Government iPhone-Hacking Toolkit Is Now in Foreign Spy and Criminal Hands (wired.com)
•
No matter the risk, I must carry my smartphone everywhere and install every app. It would be unimaginable to have the urge to look something up, but then wait to do it later until I'm using a real computer. No negative outcome will EVER shake my deep, permanent need to carry a smartphone all the time and use it for as much as possible.
•
the government doesn't have superpowerful code crackers though it has a guy working at apple who introduces the subtle vulnerability he is instructed to do
•
"Possible" stripped from the headline on HN. That word seems particularly important given that it's speculative: "Clues suggest it was originally built for the US government."
•
How could something as sensitive get out of an administration as competent as the current one? At least they have no access to lets say AI or autonomous weapons and the tools of mass surveillance ...
you're just on a technical site, so readers want citations for conjectures, because the readers generally and genuinely want to learn more edit: sibling comment agrees
•
I guess the technical side is for the bots to find holes in my argument. Anyone with a brain in tech that knows of the US and it's invasion into privacy knows that the US having an iOS "Hacking Toolkit" is nightmare fuel. I already assumed it did, just glad Wired put it down on paper for the rest of us. Writing an article that "it's escaped the hands of the US government and into the hands of foreign hands" doesn't change my opinion of the abuse of power. Citation: Edward Snowden - Present Day (Flock, etc)
•
heh, saying hitler was a war criminal requires citations?
I think the downvotes come from the friction of the language used and the lack of sources to back the claim. If you linked some stories, it would add some weight to the statement.
•
Have we already forgotten about Edward Snowden & the NSA?
•
How many people on this site are unaware of the amount of times the government's courts have found its executive, legislative, (and lower judicial) branches acting without authority? How many people on this site are unaware of the extent to which we are monitored? And openly? We have an entire agency whose primary task is to mass surveil.
•
I think all the things are true at the same time... that most people already believe it, they don't need sources in this instance, but they still don't like the way the comment was worded.
An Interactive Intro to CRDTs (2023) (jakelazaroff.com)
•
Previously... An interactive intro to CRDTs - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37764581 - Oct 2023 (130 comments)
Enjoyed the article! As someone who's worked on bits of collaborative software (and is currently helping build one at work), I'd caution people from using CRDTs in general. A central server is the right tool for the job in most cases; there are certain things that are difficult to handle with CRDTs, like permissions and acquiring locks on objects. Edit: I had an excerpt here which I completely misread. Sorry.
•
Here's a 2019 Figma article on this, not sure if its representative of their current system > OTs power most collaborative text-based apps such as Google Docs. They’re the most well-known technique but in researching them, we quickly realized they were overkill for what we wanted to achieve ... > Figma's tech is instead inspired by something called CRDTs, which stands for conflict-free replicated data types. ... Figma isn't using true CRDTs though. CRDTs are designed for decentralized systems where there is no single central authority to decide what the final state should be https://www.figma.com/blog/how-figmas-multiplayer-technology-works/
Heh. Find how to grant permissions/ acquire lock in git. You can not. That is fundamental to distributed systems. Downside: harder to think about it all. Upside: a rocket may hit the datacenter. From what I remember about Figma, it can be proclaimed CRDT. Google Docs got their sync algorithm before CRDT was even known (yep, I remember those days!).
•
Of course. But typical, live collaborative software doesn't need to be (and shouldn't be) decentralized. In such software it's annoying to not be able to (even speculatively) acquire unique access to an object. I'd be very surprised if Google Docs used CRDTs now.
GitHub Is Having Issues (githubstatus.com)
•
I spent hours trying to figure out what was wrong with GHCR, &^$% Github. I'm on the lookout for an alternative to Github, this is really not acceptable.
•
A directory over SSH can be your git server. If your CI isn't too complex, a post-receive hook looping into Docker can be enough. I wrote up about self hosting git and builds a few weeks ago[1]. There are heavier solutions, but even setting something like this up as a backstop might be useful. If your blog is being hammered by ChatGPT traffic, spare a thought for Github. I can only imagine their traffic has ballooned phenomenally. 1: https://duggan.ie/posts/self-hosting-git-and-builds-without-running-a-bunch-of-web-services
has anyone at MS tried unplugging azure and plugging azure back in yet?
•
It's Microsoft. You're supposed to Ctrl+Alt+Del.
Too slow: https://github-incidents.pages.dev/
•
That site could use a little more. Maybe a count of how many in the current month and year, tallies for each year, maybe even trends. Could be nice. :)
This is very worrying if their mandate doesn't include quality control.
•
[delayed]
I swear this is my fault. I can go weeks without doing infra work. Github does fine, I don't see any hiccups, status page is all green. But the day comes that I need to tweak a deploy flow, or update our testing infra and about halfway through the task I take the whole thing down. It's gotten to the point where when there's an outage I'm the first person people ask what I'm doing...and it's pretty dang consistent....
•
Sounds like my Dad, who used to have an uncanny ability to get stuck in elevators. Even got stuck in one with his claustrophobia therapist.
do you know the Pauli-Effect? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauli_effect
•
Related: In FreeBSD we used to talk often about the Wemm Field. Peter Wemm was one of the early FreeBSD developers and responsible for most of the early project server cluster, and hardware had a phenomenal habit of breaking in his vicinity. One notable story I heard involved transporting servers between data centers and hitting a Christmas tree in the middle of a highway... in March.
I would so very much love to see GitHub switch gears from building stuff like Copilot etc and focus on availability
•
The #1 priority at GitHub for this year is migrating from their own data center to Azure, any other work that gets in the way of this is being deprioritized: https://thenewstack.io/github-will-prioritize-migrating-to-azure-over-feature-development/
This is an absurd state they are at! Weekly outages in 2025 and 2026. From developer beloved and very solid to Microslop went faster than I expected
•
They may have been Beloved before MS bought them. It takes awhile for technical debt to catch up.
Iran War Cost Tracker (iran-cost-ticker.com)
•
What would have happened if the US dis not get involved in WWII. We would probably not be here... Not everything is short sighted bean counters. Having major cities explode by nuclear devices in the US will surely cost more.
•
Iran has been weeks away from a nuke for decades. What evidence is there that they were any closer this time, or that this war was necessary to delay or block their progress?
•
The war is for Israel, sorry I should say Greater Israel.
•
Exactly. The alternative was to let Iran (while under a suicidal theocratic regime) get nukes? Imagine if Dubai was struck by nukes instead of drones.
•
We had a nuclear deal with them, which was ripped up by the same man currently in charge of the US.
•
The alternative was not bombing them in the middle of negotiations.
•
Dear Americans, what are the costs of the 165 killed children of the Minab school airstrike[1]? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Minab_school_airstrike
•
low, if the claims are true iran has 1000ish lbs of 60% uranium. we shall see
For the prospects of the freedom and subsequent prosperity of the oppressed Iranian people, peace in the Middle East, and safety of the commercial shipping routes, I fully approve my tax dollars to the matter.
•
Do you believe that those goals will be achieved? Given the historical track record of these kinds of interventions, I do not.
•
Iraq. Afghanistan. Iraq, again. Syria. Libya. Iran. Iran, again. Yeah - this is totally gonna work this time.
Do you really believe killing 175 children[0] will bring peace and prosperity to the Iranian people? [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/01/world/middleeast/girls-school-strike-iran-video.html
•
That news piece was officially dismissed after investigation by the IDF and CENTCOM. I would bring to your awareness that you're using an emotional argument with no substance, and it discounts the decades of complex history in the region.
•
>investigation by the IDF and CENTCOM this has to be bait, right?
•
Perhaps the original comment, putting forth debunked IRGC propaganda, and presenting it as definitely true, was bait.
OK, I don't. I wonder if we could set up some sort of legislative system that could debate this on our behalf and make a reasonable plan that accounts for our differing viewpoints.
•
I've found that if two people sit together and are willing to talk long enough, they'll eventually be able to actually hear each other, and usually they are more in agreement than the media-installed reactions and assumptions we have. Only with a few would we vehemently disagree. I'm talking about reasonable people though, like your calm reply.
I don't agree with your perspective, but I do support Iran no longer being a threat to anyone else in the region, no matter what.
•
Do you support Israel no longer being a threat to anyone else in the region, no matter what?
Yeah that’s the likely outcome given our track record /s
•
Venezuela is undergoing tremendous freedom and hope. My fellow Venezuelans and I are super grateful for the well-planned, surgical mission of the US. They can have all the oil they want and help restore our industries in exchange for their financial benefit and partnership, which is the most recent track record.
•
I think that interventions in the region of interest, the middle east, are more relevant data points than Venezuela.
Reductive tropes?OP is pointing out a serious flaw in US federal spending. Namely our lack of spending on healthcare and our intensive spending on killing people from a distance
•
> Namely our lack of spending on healthcare The federal govt spent about 2.6-2.8 trillion dollars[1] on healthcare in 2025 - including Medicare, Medicaid, ACA subsidies, VA/DoD health and federal employee benefits). In what world is that "lack of spending" ? [1] https://www.pgpf.org/article/healthcare-spending-will-be-one-fifth-of-the-economy-within-a-decade/
If budgets are what interest you, maybe consider why Iran spent over $500B developing offensive nuclear weapons. Instead of peaceful pursuits or defenses against its supposed aggressor over 1,000 miles away.
•
> maybe consider why Iran spent over $500B developing offensive nuclear weapons. To protect themselves from the exact scenairo happening right now? The reason why Putin is sleeping peacefully in his bed while Khamenei is dead under rubble is that one has nuclear deterent while the other din't have that protection. > supposed aggressor I don’t know if there is anything “supposed” about that aggressor given the present situation.
Universal healthcare is cheaper than our system of healthcare by a factor of 2 (comparing other OECD countries). If we raised taxes and implemented universal healthcare we’d save about $1T a year. Cost isn’t the relevant factor, it’s politics. Or more accurately, naked bribery that we, for some insane reason, call “lobbying”.
•
I've looked into this for work and no way. You must unfactor the European models getting subsidized by the current US model. Some very smart people have looked at fixing the system, and there's no golden goose (except ozempic maybe). We'll need pharmacological breakthroughs. Also, regrettably - A LOT of medical care is unnecessary but we love grandma.
•
> You must unfactor the European models getting subsidized by the current US model. But they don't. This is clearly a pro-insurer talking point. Europe just negotiates on a state based level so therefore is able to negotiate better prices.
•
> If we raised taxes and implemented universal healthcare we’d save about $1T a year If it saves $1T, then why does it require raising taxes?
•
idk maybe those savings are not upfront but are more around productivity improvements and so on.
This doesn't include generational damage in sentiment: * Europe is in trouble because they can't get gas from Russia, Qatar stopped supplying gas * Japan is in trouble because Middle East supplies its 75% of oil, which is blocked now * Ukraine is in dilemma, because US giving every support to Israel, but not to Ukraine * Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain is asking questions, if US can't defend us and is moving all defensive missiles to protect Israel, why should we even be ally with them in the future, they're scared even more (except UAE) that people might overthrow those kings if things continue this way * Africa understood its better to work with China, than with US
•
That’s just the tip of the iceberg. People here seem to also have no perspective, since it is not in the wheelhouse of most tech people, on the fact that this is all a part of a 40 year strategy (as Netanyahu himself has openly stated) that some refer to as the “the Clean Break Strategy” or the “7 countries in 5 years memo”[1]. It clearly took longer than 5 years, but they definitely tried and even the likes of Hillary “we came, we saw, he died” Clinton was a party of that. People always squabble over blue team vs red team, never realizing that the whole game is just a ruse to provide a sense of democratic control to placate the public, and also give the apparatchiks if the regime a sense of autonomy, when in fact they’re just all pulling at the same continuity of agenda like beasts of burden, being whipped and rode by a very small group that hold their reins. [1] https://x.com/wikileaks/status/1819709215352438921?lang=en
I think citizens in those countries recognize that allowing a repressive regime to exist simply for cheap oil costs is not necessarily a good solution, either.
•
"Allowing a repressive regime to exist" is precisely the social contract of every citizen of every country. Haven't you ever heard of taxes?
•
No, we realize US americans elected gerontoidiot Trump, and we constnantly ask ourselves what the actual fuck after every third act of this senile imbecile. Do you not have young (like at least < 60) people who can actually think critically, have strategy, hold ideas for more than 30 seconds. Are you impressed by senility? Why do you support someone who attacks european countries frequently just on the basis of whimsy shit like not wanting to go to war with you into wars of aggression agaisnt third countries, like you attacked Spain most recently? What the actual fuck? That people think in terms of good/vs/evil and that US will somehow come out of this as a liked country that did good is beyond me. The constant attempts at painting some morals or grand strategy over the constant random unhinged acts of senile imbecile that gets bootlicked by everyone around him just comes out as insane. That's what at least this european thinks of US, yeah. :) Unhinged country with unhinged lunatic at the top, all this is.
until your energy bills impact your pocket directly, while you were laid off from your manufacturing plant, because their cost structure is not competitive without cheap Russian oil/gas Look at the correlation here starting from 2022: https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/recent-weakness-german-manufacturing-sector
•
This is akin to someone in 1861 saying US cotton plantations, and by extension the entire Southern economy, aren't viable without slavery, so let's allow slavery to run. Western liberal civilization has theta decay without occasional violent interventions.
Israel should get support because supporting Israel right to exist, for me, is the right thing, and because its strategic goals and values align with those of the US.
•
> values align with those of the US Some values those are. Yikes.
I'd rather have a tracker to show how close the Orange One is to his coveted Peace Prize.
•
He stole María Corina Machado‘s and has the much coveted one from FIFA too.
"Interests." I'd love to know what the price per barrel the U.S. has paid in the last few years when you factor in additional costs incurred due to involvement in Iraq and Syria.
•
While oil is a major interest its hardly the only one. USA is still playing at being world hegemon in competition with china and to a lesser extent russia. Maintaining alliances is a part of that.
•
> USA is still playing at being world hegemon in competition with china and to a lesser extent russia. Maintaining alliances is a part of that. The US has been actively disrupting its most critical alliance, NATO, recently. Threatening to invade an allied nation's territory or force them to hand it over to us to prevent an invasion. Now threatening to block trade with NATO nations. The current administration is doing a terrible job of maintaining alliances.
I'd be curious to know what group thought that Ukraine would be taken in 2 weeks, but also thinks that the Iranian war will be a quagmire. Either they have a lot of information I'm missing, are complete idiots, or are being dishonest.
•
You’re missing my point. No one can know at this stage. It’s called fog of war. Those who pretend offer easy explanations because people crave easy answers. It’s not satisfying to say: "it’s very complex, we can’t know, here are the odds". But that’s the current state of affairs.
Is there good evidence for this?
•
Yes. Their repeated warnings that Iran would no longer tolerate the kind of back-and-forth blame shifting that think-tank policy papers openly described years ago as a strategy to keep Iran off sides, and that any attack by Israel would be considered an attack by the USA too and that American assets that surrounded Iran would be attacked; since under all the clownish “who? Meeee?”act gaslighting and stupid pathological lies, everyone knows they are one and the same. It’s like dealing with psychopathic toddlers who think people aren’t smart enough to know they are lying when they deny killing the family pet even though their hands are covered in blood and you just watched them mid act of slaughtering the family pet.
History does not say otherwise. The US however has a history of attacking Iran, including murdering 190 people on a civilian flight: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655
•
Not sure why this comment is downvoted: the facts are established, as is (among others) the Mosaddegh coup d'état co-organized by the US: > On 19 August 1953, Prime Minister of Iran Mohammad Mosaddegh was overthrown in a coup d'état that strengthened the rule of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the shah of Iran. It was instigated by the United Kingdom (MI6), under the name Operation Boot[5][6][7][8] and the United States (CIA), under the name TP-AJAX Project[9] or Operation Ajax. A key motive was to protect British oil interests in Iran after Mosaddegh nationalized the country's oil industry. (...) > In August 2013, the U.S. government formally acknowledged the U.S. (...) was in charge of both the planning and the execution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat Or the US backing of Saddam Hussein from 1982 onwards during the Iraq-Iran 8-year war of aggression, with “massive loans, political influence, and intelligence on Iranian deployments gathered by American spy satellites”. During this war, Iraq employed chemical weapons leading to 50.000 - 100.000 Irani deaths . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War This (and other pieces of historical context) help very much understand the Iranian insistence on a ballistic missile program.
*290 people. Mistook an Airbus A300 for an F-14. Maybe it's an easy mistake to make on radar back in the day?
•
Back in the day, or even now. Kuwait’s US-supplied air defense shot down three US F15s this weekend.
History really doesn’t say otherwise. Tensions were mostly cooling after the Obama nuclear deal. Now the message we’ve told the world is: If you don’t want to eventually be at risk of the US attacking you, you better be nuclear armed.
•
Of course they cooled Iran kept enriching uranium and the rest of the world agreed to ignore it.
Doesn't mean the direction wasn't correct. Take any American, and treat them the way Americans treat others, and they would be forming terrorist cells (gorilla war), building nukes, basically every single thing they could to fight back. To never surrender. Remember Red Dawn? That would be an American Response, to what America is doing. That is it basically. If shoe was on other foot, Americans would never surrender. So, why are we expecting others to give up quietly?
•
> So, why are we expecting others to give up quietly? We're not. That's why we're bombing the regime and associated military targets. Iran was never expected to give up quietly.
•
Think you are missing the point. They aren't going to just give up after a few weeks of bombing. Will need boots on the ground versus a resistance/multiple sides of a civil war, and now we have another 20 year war. People don't just shrug and go "all shucks, yuck yuck, guess you got us, i'll roll over"
Carriers aren't meant to hang out at port at home. The US has protected global sea lanes for 80 years.
•
Exactly: that protection isn't happening right now because those resources are doing something else. The money would be spent anyway, but doing something that is normally considered useful, and that useful thing is not happening to the same capacity as before. Therefore there is an opportunity cost to consider.
•
The Houthis have been doing a lot of shipping lane disruption, recently. They have sunk several ships. Iran's Islamic regime has provided material and monetary support to the Houthis. Crippling their capabilities aligns with the goal of protecting global shipping.
> The US has protected global sea lanes for 80 years. But rather than protect global sea lanes, the US is bombing Iran. That’s not the same thing. The idea that the war isn’t costing money for personnel because those people would be doing something anyway makes no sense. They could be doing something else. In fact, they could be doing something that increases the wealth and wellbeing of the world, rather than destroying things. So from that perspective, the cost is far higher than what is shown here. Then there’s the loss of innocent lives. It would be unconscionable to put a price tag on the lives of dozens of Iranian girls killed when their school was flattened and to show it on this website, and yet, this is not “free” either.
•
> But rather than protect global sea lanes, the US is bombing Iran. That’s not the same thing. With Iran's support of the Houthi I think you'll find they are exactly the same thing.
What about tens of thousands of peaceful civilians who have been killed by the Iranian regime during past decades? The alternative to this war is allowing the Iranian government to keep doing that, business as usual. In my opinion bombing people responsible for these atrocities increases the well-being of the world. Most Iranians seem to agree.
•
This justification for bombing Iran is dumb as fuck. In a few days the number of civilians killed by US-Israeli bombings will surpass the number of civilians killed by the regime in decades.
sometimes there are more than two options between "do nothing" and the clusterfuck the current administration has embarked on.
•
Sometimes yes, but is there in this specific case? Because from my vantage point it looks like the choice is, status quo or bomb them. Its not like america can double sanction iran, they are already fully economically sanctioned. What is the middle ground here?
> But rather than protect global sea lanes, the US is bombing Iran. That’s not the same thing. Arguably the primary threat to modern sea lanes is Iran. Right now Iran is harrasing traffic. Previously the Houthis, generally considered an Iranian proxy, were harrasing traffic. Its all kind of the same war, this is just the end game.
•
The end game is when the US backed dictatorships collapse, this is the end of American power, not the beginning.
•
That seems pretty unlikely at the moment.
Because they love supporting and exporting terrorism via the Houthis, Hamas, and Hezbollah.
•
"terrorism" who bombed them first and repeatedly? and embargoed and sanctioned them before that? and tore up the nuclear deal? and before that installed the shah so we could get the oil?
If it were that straightforward, right now the US would (A) have a consistent set of demands/goals that include shipping security and (B) a large international coalition of support. Neither are true.
•
US messaging has been all over the place, but stop funding proxies has been one of the more consistent parts. To be clear, im not saying protecting shipping is the primary reason for this war. I'm just saying if that is what you think usa should be doing, then this war makes sense. As far as b) there are a lot of factors. Its not like freedom of navigation is the top concern of every country in the world.
We have surplus carriers specifically to allow them to average a large percentage of their time at home unlike container ships who spend the vast majority of their time in service. Many systems that are both bespoke and complex means lots and lots of maintenance issues. Sure the Navy can Airlift in parts etc, but that’s obviously very expensive and less obviously more dangerous.
•
We don't have a surplus of carriers. We have a shortage , at least relative to their current tasking. They're overstretched and behind on maintenance. This is unsustainable so the civilian leadership will have to either cut back on missions or build more.
This strike isn't even close to Hamas-levels of planning. If anything Hamas got the US to make an unforced mistake in a game of checkers three moves out. According to the IDF's analysis of captured Hamas documents, step 2 was: "Get Israel to commit so many war crimes that we actually have the moral high ground. Then, regional partners will be forced to support us again, and our recruitment numbers go back up. Do everything we can to ensure the conflict expands across borders to secure future funding and alliances." The crazy thing is the IDF knew this and published the report. Only after acknowledging that it was their only losing move did they start committing a bunch of war crimes! Hamas' public support, funding and recruitment levels were rapidly approaching zero until the Palestinian genocide started. Now they're part of a regional conflict and arguably still hold the moral high ground, depending on how you tally things up. That was fantasy-land for them before the strikes. It's almost like the IDF's funding is contingent on Hamas' continued existence, and, barring that, perpetual regional conflict. It's too bad that civilians always lose in these conflicts, and right-wing criminals almost always win.
•
> This strike isn't even close to Hamas-levels of planning. Yes it is, its an attack without any surefire plans for later stages of the war. While they might fluke it, I don't see how just missiling a bunch of targets and murdering a nation's leader really achieves tangible change. Its like a bully taking a swing at someone in class, they can, so they do, but there's no thought about end outcomes. They might get lunch money, or get away with doing it, but they could also get detention, or be suspended or expelled. The Hamas plan was something like: 1. we murder them 2. they retaliate horrifically 3. ??? 4. the intifada goes global and lebanon and syria and maybe other arab nations all rise up and attack israel. and that remains my issue with the US plan, there isn't one. Either have ground troops ready or militias in place and armed. Don't just start a war for a laugh and if you do; then take it seriously. We're talking about worst case outcomes for hundreds of thousands if not millions and the US is currently just treating with the seriousness of a casual hand of poker.
More accurately, Israel was going to attack Iran, and US intelligence stated that Iranian retaliation planning was to target US forces, along with most gulf nations and shipping lanes, so US preempted that retaliation.
•
If the retaliation was preempted they wouldn't have retaliated, but they have. What the US actually did was provide justification for the retaliation against US bases in the region by joining in the opening salvo.
•
That's quite a preemptive form of preemption! Was the US intelligence from the same source that stated that Iraq was acquiring "yellowcake" from Niger?
•
Maybe you haven't noticed but they have not preempted anything.
Intel's make-or-break 18A process node debuts for data center with 288-core Xeon (tomshardware.com)
•
Sure looks like a lot of glue holding that CPU together :)
Only slightly related, but six years ago I was able to run 400 ZX Spectrum (Z80) emulator instances simultaneously on an AWS graphics workstation. https://youtu.be/BjeVzEQW4C8?si=0I7UGU0Xz5WUT4ek
•
I remember that. Neat stuff.
You know, a link would be great for this comment.
•
Well Linux was booted on an Intel 4004, emulating a MIPS R3000. Looks like it booted in 4.76 days. I don't believe this article was AI fabricated. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/09/hacker-boots-linux-on-intels-first-ever-cpu/
•
Somehow, that still doesn't sound real, but it looks like it is. Wow. Though that one was written by their recently fired hallucination writer.
https://theonion.com , probably
•
Ah, nice to see a fellow lover of the finest news publication on the planet.
Why do you needs so many cores for? Apache threads? Any old school wizard here?
•
data processing
•
I used to run many hosts with 28 cores per host. If performance scales, it's nicer to have a few 288 core hosts rather than a few hundred 28 core hosts. Getting the performance to scale can be hard, of course. The less inter-core communication the better. Things that tend to work well are either stuff where a bunch of data comes in and a single thread works on it for a significant amount of time then ships the result or things where you can rely on the NIC(s) to split traffic and you can process the network queue for a connecrion on the same core that handles the userspace stuff (see Receive Side Scaling), but you need a fancy NIC to have 288 network queues.
With packages like this (lots of cores, multi-chip packaging, lots of memory channels), the architecture is increasingly a small cluster on a package rather than a monolithic CPU. I wonder whether the next bottleneck becomes software scheduling rather than silicon - OS/runtimes weren’t really designed with hundreds of cores and complex interconnect topologies in mind.
•
Yes there are scheduling issues, Numa problems , etc caused by the cluster in a box form factor. We had a massive performance issue a few years ago that we fixed by mapping our processes to the numa zones topology . The default design of our software would otherwise effectively route all memory accesses to the same numa zone and performance went down the drain.
•
Intel contributes to Linux, how is this a problem?
> I wonder whether the next bottleneck becomes software scheduling rather than silicon Yep, the scheduling has been a problem for a while. There was an amazing article few years ago about how the Linux kernel was accidentally hardcoded to 8 cores, you can probably google and find it. IMO the most interesting problem right now is the cache, you get a cache miss every time a task is moving core. Problem, with thousands of threads switching between hundreds of cores every few milliseconds, we're dangerously approaching the point where all the time is spent trashing and reloading the CPU cache.
•
I searched for "Linux kernel limited to 8 cores" and found this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38260935 > This article is clickbait and in no way has the kernel been hardcoded to a maximum of 8 cores.
I think linux can handle upto 1024 cores just fine.
•
afaik the mainline limit is 4096 threads. HP sells server with 32 sockets x 60 cores/socket x 2 threads/core = 3840 threads, so we are pretty close to that limit.
??? GPU vs CPU workloads are completely different. Comparing Panther Lake iGPU vs Ryzen iGPU is not going to tell you much about how high density server CPU performance will work out. The Panther Lake vs Ryzen laptop performance comparisons show that Pather Lake does well, basically trading against top end Ryzen AI laptop chips in both absolute performance, and performance per watt.
•
If you're not aware, Intel has released a lineup of laptops, with some models having the GPU made by them and some having the same GPU made by TSMC. That makes the comparison very direct. TSMC can deliver nearly 3 times the power/performance. GPU and CPU manufacturing is the same thing, same node, same result. GPU is always maximizing perf/power ratio because it's embarrassingly parallel, leaving no room to game the benchmark. CPU can be gamed by having a single fast core, that drops performance in half as soon as you use another core.
These sorts of core-density increases are how I win cloud debates in an org. * Identify the workloads that haven't scaled in a year. Your ERPs, your HRIS, your dev/stage/test environments, DBs, Microsoft estate, core infrastructure, etc. (EDIT, from zbentley: also identify any cross-system processing where data will transfer from the cloud back to your private estate to be excluded, so you don't get murdered with egress charges) * Run the cost analysis of reserved instances in AWS/Azure/GCP for those workloads over three years * Do the same for one of these high-core "pizza boxes", but amortized over seven years * Realize the savings to be had moving "fixed infra" back on-premises or into a colo versus sticking with a public cloud provider Seriously, what took a full rack or two of 2U dual-socket servers just a decade ago can be replaced with three 2U boxes with full HA/clustering. It's insane. Back in the late '10s, I made a case to my org at the time that a global hypervisor hardware refresh and accompanying VMware licenses would have an ROI of 2.5yrs versus comparable AWS infrastructure, even assuming a 50% YoY rate of license inflation (this was pre-Broadcom; nowadays, I'd be eyeballing Nutanix, Virtuozzo, Apache Cloudstack, or yes, even Proxmox, assuming we weren't already a Microsoft shop w/ Hyper-V) - and give us an additional 20% headroom to boot. The only thing giving me pause on that argument today is the current RAM/NAND shortage, but even that's (hopefully) temporary - and doesn't hurt the orgs who built around a longer timeline with the option for an additional support runway (like the three-year extended support contracts available through VARs). If we can't bill a customer for it, and it's not scaling regularly, then it shouldn't be in the public cloud. That's my take, anyway. It sucks the wind from the sails of folks gung-ho on the "fringe benefits" of public cloud spend (box seats, junkets, conference tickets, etc...), but the finance teams tend to love such clear numbers.
•
That only works if purchasers in the organisation are immune to kickbacks.
•
> The only thing giving me pause on that argument today is the current RAM/NAND shortage Not a shortage - price gouging. And it would mean an increase in the 'cloud' prices because they need to refresh the HW too. So by the summer the equation would be back to it.
•
I just don't know if the human capital is there. At my job we use HyperV, and finding someone who actually knows HyperV is difficult and expensive. Throw in Cisco networking, storage appliances, etc to make it 99.99% uptime... Also that means you have just one person, you need at least two if you don't want gaps in staffing, more likely three. Then you still need all the cloud folks to run that. We have a hybrid setup like this, and you do get a bit of best of both worlds, but ultimately managing onprem or colo infra is a huge pain in the ass. We only do it due to our business environment.
•
> These sorts of core-density increases are how I win cloud debates in an org. AMD has had these sorts of densities available for a minute. > Identify the workloads that haven't scaled in a year. I have done this math recently, and you need to stop cherry picking and move everything. And build a redundant data center to boot. Compute is NOT the major issue for this sort of move: Switching and bandwidth will be major costs. 400gb is a minimum for interconnects and for most orgs you are going to need at least that much bandwidth top of rack. Storage remains problematic. You might be able to amortize compute over this time scale, but not storage. 5 years would be pushing it (depending on use). And data center storage at scale was expensive before the recent price spike. Spinning rust is viable for some tasks (backup) but will not cut it for others. Human capital: Figuring out how to support the hardware you own is going to be far more expensive than you think. You need to expect failures and staff accordingly, that means resources who are going to be, for the most part, idle.
The main cost with on-prem is not the price of the gear but the price of acquiring talent to manage the gear. Most companies simply don't have the skillset internally to properly manage these servers, or even the internal talent to know whether they are hiring a good infrastructure engineer or not during the interview process. For those that do, your scaling example works against you. If today you can merge three services into one, then why do you need full time infrastructure staff to manage so few servers? And remember, you want 24/7 monitoring, replication for disaster recovery, etc. Most businesses do not have IT infrastructure as a core skill or differentiator, and so they want to farm it out.
•
Managing AWS is a ton of work anyway
•
This factually did not play out like this in my experience. The company did need the same exact people to manage AWS anyway. And the cost difference was so high that it was possible to hire 5 more people which wasn't needed anyway. Not only the cost but not needing to worry about going over the bandwidth limit and having soo much extra compute power made a very big difference. Imo the cloud stuff is just too full of itself if you are trying to solve a problem that requires compute like hosting databases or similar. Just renting a machine from a provider like Hetzner and starting from there is the best option by far.
•
> The company did need the same exact people to manage AWS anyway. That is incorrect. On AWS you need a couple DevOps that will Tring together the already existing services. With on premise, you need someone that will install racks, change disks, setup high availability block storage or object storage, etc. Those are not DevOps people.
•
To be clear, I'm not writing about on-premise. I mean difference between managed cloud and renting dedicated servers
•
Ops people are typically more useful given you probably already have devs.
> even the internal talent to know whether they are hiring a good infrastructure engineer or not during the interview process. This is really the core problem. Every time I’ve done the math on a sizable cloud vs on-prem deployment, there is so much money left on the table that the orgs can afford to pay FAANG-level salaries for several good SREs but never have we been able to find people to fill the roles or even know if we had found them. The numbers are so much worse now with GPUs. The cost of reserved instances (let alone on-demand) for an 8x H100 pod even with NVIDIA Enterprise licenses included leaves tens of thousands per pod for the salary of employees managing it. Assuming one SREs can manage at least four racks the hardware pays for itself, if you can find even a single qualified person.
•
Self-hosted 8xH100 is ~$250k, depreciated across three years => $80k/year, with power and cooling => $90k/year (~$10/hour total). AWS charges $55/hour for EC2 p5.48xlarge instance, which goes down with 1 or 3 year commitments. With 1 year commitment, it costs ~$30/hour => $262k per year. 3-year commitment brings price down to $24/hour => $210k per year. This price does NOT include egress, and other fees. So, yeah, there is a $120k-$175k difference that can pay for a full-time on-site SRE, even if you only need one 8xH100 server.
> These sorts of core-density increases are how I win cloud debates in an org. The core density is bullshit when each core is so slow that it can't do any meaningful work. The reality is that Intel is 3 times behind AMD/TSMC on performance vs power consumption ratio. People would be better off having a look at the high frequency models (9xx5F models like the 9575F), that was the first generation of CPU server to reach ~5 GHz and sustain it on 32+ cores.
•
Intel seem to be deliberately hiding the clock frequency of this thing, the xeon-6-plus-product-deck.pdf has no mention of clock frequency or how LLC is shared.
Cloud = the right choice when just starting. It isn't about infra cost, it is about mental cost. Setting up infra is just another thing that hurts velocity. By the time you are serving a real load for the first time though you need to have the discussion about a longer term strategy and these points are valid as part of that discussion.
•
I guess it depends, but infra is also a lot simpler when starting out. It really isnt much harder (easier even?) to setup services on a box or two than managing AWS. Im pretty sure a box like this could run our whole startup, hosting PG, k8s, our backend apis, etc, would be way easier to setup, and not cost 2 devops and $40,000 a month to do it.
> If we can't bill a customer for it, and it's not scaling regularly, then it shouldn't be in the public cloud. That's my take, anyway. It sucks the wind from the sails of folks gung-ho on the "fringe benefits" of public cloud spend (box seats, junkets, conference tickets, etc...), but the finance teams tend to love such clear numbers. I agree, but . For one, it's not just the machines themselves. You also need to budget in power, cooling, space, the cost of providing redundant connectivity and side gear (e.g. routers, firewalls, UPS). Then, you need a second site, no matter what. At least for backups, ideally as a full failover. Either your second site is some sort of cloud, which can be a PITA to set up without introducing security risks, or a second physical site, which means double the expenses. If you're a publicly listed company, or live in jurisdictions like Europe, or you want to have cybersecurity insurance, you have data retention, GDPR, SOX and a whole bunch of other compliance to worry about as well. Sure, you can do that on-prem, but you'll have a much harder time explaining to auditors how your system works when it's a bunch of on-prem stuff vs. "here's our AWS Backup plans covering all servers and other data sources, here is the immutability stuff, here are plans how we prevent backup expiry aka legal hold". Then, all of that needs to be maintained, which means additional staff on payroll, if you own the stuff outright your finance team will whine about depreciation and capex, and you need to have vendors on support contracts just to get firmware updates and timely exchanges for hardware under warranty. Long story short, as much as I prefer on-prem hardware vs the cloud, particularly given current political tensions - unless you are a 200+ employee shop, the overhead associated with on-prem infrastructure isn't worth it.
•
> Then, you need a second site, no matter what. At least for backups, ideally as a full failover. Either your second site is some sort of cloud, which can be a PITA to set up without introducing security risks, or a second physical site, which means double the expenses. You can technically have backblaze's unlimited backup option which costs around 7$ for a given machine although its more intended for windows, there have been people who make it work and Daily backups and it should work with gdpr ( https://www.backblaze.com/company/policy/gdpr ) with something like hetzner perhaps if you are worried about gdpr too much and OVH storage boxes (36 TB iirc for ~55$ is a good backup box) and you should try to follow 3-2-1 strategy. > Then, all of that needs to be maintained, which means additional staff on payroll, if you own the stuff outright your finance team will whine about depreciation and capex, and you need to have vendors on support contracts just to get firmware updates and timely exchanges for hardware under warranty. I can't speak for certain but its absolutely possible to have something but iirc for companies like dell, its possible to have products be available on a monthly basis available too and you can simply colocate into a decent datacenter. Plus points in that now you can get 10-50 GB ports as well if you are too bandwidth hungry and are available for a lot lot more customizable and the hardware is already pretty nice as GP observed. (Yes Ram prices are high, lets hope that is temporary as GP noted too) I can't speak about firmware updates or timely exchanges for hardware under security. That being said, I am not saying this is for everyone as well. It does essentially boils down to if they have expertise in this field/can get expertise in this field or not for cheaper than their aws bills or not. With many large AWS bills being in 10's of thousands of dollars if not hundreds of thousands of dollars, I think that far more companies might be better off with the above strategy than AWS actually.
Any experience with the mid-to-small cloud providers that provide un-metered network ports and/or free interconnect with partner providers? (For various reasons, I just care about VPS/bare metal, and S3-compatiblity.) I'm looking at those because I'm having difficulty forecasting bandwidth usage, and the pessimistic scenarios seem to have me inside the acceptable use policies of the small providers while still predicting AWS would cost 5-10x more for the same workload.
•
Netcup and OVH provide free un-metered ports. There are actually lots of options available on the market. BuyVM is another good one.
Fire the CEO, Introducing the AxO's (boringops.sh)
•
that's why Mondragon is not Nvidia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation
•
Absolutely, I've long-doubted the usefulness of a CEO vs the theory of a self-organizing co-op.
•
> Everyone agrees: AI is coming for the developers. The $200,000-a-year engineers writing CRUD apps and maintaining CI pipelines. The line workers of the knowledge economy. Trim them. Automate them. Celebrate the efficiency gains. Watch the stock pop I very much do not think everyone agrees here, and using the Block layoffs as an example is pretty poor reasoning. It's the same kind of blind, "believe and report exactly what the companies say about these things, regardless of their incentives in saying these things" type of breathless clickbait tech journalism that is becoming extremely exhausting to wade through. There's probably a good discussion in here somewhere but the way these flimsy arguments are presented as absolute fact is a really annoying style to read, personally. This author wrote basically the complete opposite view barely more than a few months ago which makes it read even more like clickbait slop: https://boringops.sh/articles/its_the_humans_stupid/
Workers ultimately have a job because they are useful to management, and management have a job because they are useful to ownership. Top management has insane levels of compensation as a strategy by ownership to alight management's interests with their own, by turning them into owners. If there is going to be a management layer at all, for example the proposed "A-suite", then their compensation will balloon for exactly the same reasons. CxO salary isn't the market clearing price for the labor these people perform, it's more like power-leveling your friends in an RPG so that they can quest with you. Owners want their managers' interests to be with capital, so they have to give them some.
•
> Workers ultimately have a job because they are useful to managemen Workers have a job because their labour produces value
•
> Top management has insane levels of compensation as a strategy by ownership to alight management's interests with their own, by turning them into owners. If there is going to be a management layer at all, for example the proposed "A-suite", then their compensation will balloon for exactly the same reasons. That is not correct. Owner's don't align top management's interests with the owner's interests by giving them 'insane levels of compensation', they do it by giving the managements compensation in the form of shares of the company. It's not the volume of the compensation that aligns their interests, it's the type. Otherwise the 'top management' could just invest in the competitor and torpedo their own company making multiples of the original cash compensation as clients leave for the competitor.
•
True, but you should be more cynical. When push comes to shove, every famous court case between management and owners has gone the same way: management wins, owners lose (meaning when owners wanted to turn back a management decision, courts refused to do it, or when asked to actually pin that responsibility CxOs always whine about on them, financially) Why is management paid so much? Because they can make the argument "give me more, or I'll destroy the company", and actually be believable. THAT is why it's so critical for CxOs to be aligned with owners' interests.
What you're describing is called a "worker cooperative" and they are somewhat rare but do exist already in real life.
•
Are they rare? Aren’t credit unions worker cooperatives? Insurance is often structured this way, and I’ve heard of farmer collectives too. I have a worker cooperative grocery store nearby. I do photography as a hobby and there’s all kinds of photography cooperatives, including Magnum which is incredibly famous in that world. I’m in an HOA which is another cooperative. This doesn’t seem rare to me.
Why payment fees matter more than you think (cuencahighlife.com)
•
Let's just call it for what it is. Visa and mastercard innovated in an era where payment settlement was notoriously difficult and expensive but they've used their monopolies to entrench themselves in (by negotiating deals with merchants and bribing consumers with points) while the rest of the world moves on towards "layer 2" payment systems that are much cheaper and efficient.
•
[delayed]
•
Why not FedNow?
•
Shameless self-promo: We've been working for the last two years on making money movement free. We use ethereum (and stablecoins) for that, and integrate with the novel real time payment networks like PIX, Wechat, Yape, Mercadopago and so on. We're still orders of magnitude smaller than Visa and Mastercard, but I do believe products like ours (and competition is red hot here, theres so much good choice!) will be good for consumers. Money should be like a message: free and instant We're open source btw, happy to show off codebase and review PRs https://github.com/peanutprotocol/peanut-ui https://peanut.me/
Its limited to about $1000 a day. The QR is a URI with the ID, amount and maybe other stuff. It's a client-side implementation. RuPay sure "works within the system" but is pretty much useless for international payments/subscriptions. Not really a VISA/MasterCard replacement.
•
So people scan a QR code, and then enter a secure banking pin? this sounds like a security problem waiting to happen...
In the EU, we now have instant, free SEPA bank transfers. I know that the banks are trying to build a payment solution on top of this technology but it's not really getting traction. I am wondering if there is a way to bootstrap something bottom-up by offering something to merchants that has a clear value prop.
•
There is already the EPC QR code, which contains all the data required to initiate a SEPA credit transfer. This code is supported by practically all banking apps (at least in Germany). The standard is public and free (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPC_QR_code ) The merchant's system displays this code, you open your online banking app, scan the code, select "SEPA INST" (here's the usability catch!) to make the payment instantaneous, and confirm. Within 10 seconds, the money is transferred to the merchant's account. Either the merchant's bank or a third-party Open Banking API immediately informs the merchant's system (e.g. by push notification or webhook), and a receipt is issued. Everything is already here, but since this system would be virtually free to use, nobody really has an incentive to push it. It costs money to educate the public, and there is no money to be made. Instead, everyone gets paid handsomely by the card mafia.
Stripe is 2.9%+30¢ right, and that’s the advertised rate. So I assume any business seeing averages higher than that can be avoided by using a platform like Stripe.
•
The Stripe rate is a careful blend. There are many cards that are cheaper to process and there's probably a few that are more expensive to process at that rate, it works out in the wash in favor of Stripe. Also, that 30 cents is a large percentage if you're looking at a $5 transaction, for example (6%!) See the "raw" rates here: https://www.mastercard.com/content/dam/mccom/us/business/documents/merchant-rates-2025-2026.pdf
•
Small merchants are people, and people vary in their intelligence/savvyness and may have other issues like poor credit or high chargebacks that they usually forget to mention. Some people roll the cost of the terminal into a higher fee as well. I helped out a friend who owns a deli when he took over from his parents. His dad saw cash as a way to avoid taxation and had some awful payment processor where they paid a high fee and was renting a POTS based terminal - $60/mo to Verizon and $30/mo for the terminal. Now he keeps one set of books, and raised his average sale by about 10%. Their catering business, which drives profits, are up significantly with online ordering through the POS. Ditto with a non-profit I was on the board of. Pushing Venmo and Square for donations increased donations by like 30% and reduced shrink at fundraisers. Anyone who claims they can’t afford a 3% fee is going out of business anyway.
GPT‑5.3 Instant (openai.com)
•
> We heard feedback that GPT‑5.2 Instant would sometimes refuse questions it should be able to answer safely, or respond in ways that feel overly cautious or preachy, particularly around sensitive topics. Lol it won't solve the issue when ChatGPT treats me like a teenager and tells me to ask my parents about everything (I just don't want to provide my ID to OpenAI to verify my age). Btw that's why I stopped using ChatGPT in my everyday life
•
>why can't i find love in san francisco Because that´s the last thing going on your mind in San Francisco. You have long ago before going there manifest to get funding and make money, The rest is blank. No need to ask AI for that LOL
•
> GPT‑5.3 Instant also improves the quality of answers when information comes from the web. It more effectively balances what it finds online with its own knowledge and reasoning This is definitely something I've noticed GPT does much better than Claude in general. Claude preferences trying to answer everything itself without searching.
•
Interesting, I actually think Claude searches too much. (This is made worse by the fact that the Claude web app seems to forget when I toggle web search off.)
•
Maybe it's like the GPT sales pitch, needs to find a better balance. Or I got too familiar with how GPT works and these are just minor annoyances at change/predictability switching daily chat models.
•
What's the model ID? I tried gpt-5.3-instant but it says model does not exist Also don't see it on their model page
•
What's the model ID? I tried `gpt-5.3-instant` but that does not work
Perhaps, but recent developments have shown that OpenAI's "morals" are for sale and they are compliant with military goals.
•
Recent developments offer us evidence but did you really think this wouldn't be the case?
•
Altman is a consummate liar so no, I didn't.
I unsubbed because ChatGPT was no longer SOTA. They def got cheap. Reminds me of that graph where late customers are abused. OpenAI is already abusing the late customers. Claude is pretty great.
•
It's odd because I no longer really like ChatGPT. For chat-type requests, I prefer Claude, or if it's knowledge-intensive then Gemini 3 Pro (which is better for history, old novels, etc). But GPT 5.3 Codex is great. Significantly better than Opus, in the TUI coding agent.
Unsettling that the example talks about trajectories in long range projectiles given recent events..
•
Indeed, it's a rather obtuse blunder.
but sometimes, people do see things behind the curtain. The timing of talking about this topic does feel pretty strange I'd say as well as the GP comment noted?
•
My point is: You're never going to know if this is a coincidence or not. And even if it was intentional, it's of little consequence.
How likely is that they dropped this now to push the news story about quitGPT out of the headlines?
•
Not super likely, I would say. We knew 5.3 was coming for a while and sama cannot stop talking about the current situation on X.
Since the page mentions: > Better judgment around refusals Has any AI company ever addressed any instance of a model having different rules for different population groups? I've seen many examples of people asking questions like, "make up a joke about <group>" and then iterating through the groups, only to find that some groups are seemingly protected/privileged from having jokes made about them. Has any AI company ever addressed studies like [1] which found that models value certain groups vastly more than others? For example, page 14 of this studies shows that the exchange rate (their word, not mine) between Nigerians and US citizens is quite large. [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2502.08640
•
Are you trying to make an allegory for the more important topic like "plan a surgical strike agains <group>"
This idea that you can undo some wrongs that have been done to some group of people by doing some wrongs to some other group of people, and then claiming the moral highground, is really one of the or perhaps the dumbest idea we have ever come up with.
•
yee old Billionaire trolley problem "If we do anything, one white dude with too much money might suffer"
Are you just talking hypothetically about an abstract harm that might occur in an imaginary world or do you think that's what DEI is?
•
Are you denying that that's what DEI is?
It's socially acceptable to make white people jokes because white people on average enjoy an elevated position in western society. It's viewed as 'punching up'. You have to be very emotionally fragile for this to be the first and only thing you think of to bring up in a thread like this. It's also supremely uninteresting cable news talking point slop.
•
> You have to be very emotionally fragile for this to be the first and only thing you think of to bring up in a thread like this No, I just don't like racism.
•
> It's viewed as 'punching up' Shouldn't we be building systems that don't punch anyone in racist ways? Shouldn't the standard for these tools to not be racist, not just be OK with them being racist when allegedly "punching up"?
Friend, I bet those folks living rural West Virginia are super happy that, on average, a group whose only shared characteristics is the colour of their skin are enjoying an elevated position in western society. Super happy. All racism is gross.
•
I bet they are happy. It means ICE won't harass you.
•
Ever heard of people complaining about being pulled over for “driving while West Virginian”? Why or why not?
It's because people like choice and control, and "5.2" vs "5.2 thinking" is confusing. Making them "5.2 instant" and "5.2 thinking" is less confusing to more people. Their competitors already do this (Gemini 3 Fast & Gemini 3 Thinking).
•
ChatGPT 5.2 Intuitive ChatGPT 5.2 Ponderous “I had this dream the other night…” – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gYIbMwswKM
Yeah, for a while ChatGPT Plus has been powered by two series of models under the hood. One series is the Instant series, which is faster and more tuned to ChatGPT, but less accurate. The second series is the Thinking series, which is more accurate and more tuned to professional knowledge work, but slower (because it uses more reasoning tokens). We'd also prefer to have simple experience with just one option, but picking just one would pull back the pareto frontier for some group of people/preferences. So for now we continue to serve two models, with manual control for people who want to choose and an imperfect auto switcher for people who don't want to be bothered. Could change down the road - we'll see. (I work at OpenAI.)
•
but why not have "sane defaults but configurable"? hide away the extra complexity for everyone. give power users a way to get it back.
Why No AI Games? (franklantz.substack.com)
•
Compelled to point out there was a wave of "AI games" before proper generative models too: the Kinect used decision forests for pose estimation [1], but in an example of the "AI effect", the Kinect games are mostly remembered as cumbersome and largely dancing-themed, not specifically AI/ML games [1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/kinect-body-tracking-reaps-renown/
•
I think the biggest issue with any sort of AI games is the fact most of them are so open ended, the buck ends with your own creativity. When you are the one in control of so much, you quickly get tired when you run out of the story you want to tell. I have a bit of hope that some sort of proper setup will fix this issue, especially with multiple agents able to pass json to and from the "game" side and the writer side. One of my ideas is an open-ended roguelike card game where the player runs through a bunch of player-created scenarios and builds their deck by taking things from that world to the next, so people can compare how their build influenced their version of the scenario.
•
People are not intrinsically fun? What on earth is this author saying?? As for why no AI games, it's pretty simple really. Planet-destroying plagiarism machines built at a steep loss by oligarchs who delight in putting artists out of business are not fun!
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
Disable Your SSH access accidentally with scp (sny.sh)
I have a few observations about this article. Generally, try not to use SCP. It has been a crufty old program from the Berkeley R-Utilities, but newer OpenSSH releases have rewritten it to use the sftp-server server instead. There will be wildly different behavior between these implementations. The backend SCP changes are documented here: https://lwn.net/Articles/835962/ If you need something that SFTP cannot do, then use tar on both sides. PuTTY has implemented their pscp to prefer the sftp-server for many years, in a long prediction of the eventual abandonment. Their pscp implementation is a better drop-in replacement than the OpenSSH solutions. The allure of SCP is retry on failure, which is somewhat more difficult with SFTP: until scp source.txt user@target:dir/ do echo target down; sleep 300 done Converting that to pscp is much easier than SFTP. I also have an older rhel5 system where I am running tinysshd to use better SSH crypto. Due to upgrades, NFS is now squashing everything to nobody, so I had to disable precisely these checks to let users login with their authorized_keys. I can post the code if anybody is curious.
•
> Their pscp implementation is a better drop-in replacement than the OpenSSH solutions. What makes it a better drop in replacement?
you sound so wise and produce excellent reference, but in the next breath you show NFS in use? signed -confused
•
What would you use for remote mounting filesystems? I don't know of any that are simply superior (w/o caveats/tradeoffs).
This is a useful tip! but also... who has a dir with 777 permissions? Is that something people do nowadays?
•
I've seen users who have every file set to 777. They do it to "avoid permissions issues"
I suspect you're hitting the page where they're running https://iocaine.madhouse-project.org/ Perhaps you got bot flagged or something
•
That URL gives me a 418 I'm a teapot error with no body. I'm guessing they don't like my VPN.
I assume using `./*` rather than `.` in the `scp` command would have worked around the issue?
•
Using './*' would have avoided this in most shells because ordinary globbing excludes dotfiles, so .ssh and authorized_keys are not matched. In my experience scp is brittle for bulk syncs, so I run rsync -a --exclude='.ssh' --dry-run ./ user@host:~/target to verify before I commit the changes. I keep an out of band recovery path, like a temporary deploy key, a nonprivileged rescue user, or console access, as the only reliable way to avoid being locked out at 3AM.
Florida public universities to pause hiring new H-1B workers (wusf.org)
I actually disagree that just because something is a popular issue necessarily means there's need for reform, people are perfectly capable of driving themselves into a frenzy over something that, when actually examined, is functioning appropriately.
•
Well this isn't a new issue to me, I've been talking about H1B reform for a decade now before Tiktok ragebait existed. Mostly based on my experience trying to immigrate to the US and speaking to immigration lawyers. This isn't new and there's endless real examples of poor enforcement. The situation here is even worse in Canada regarding education Visas, it's a giant backdoor for loose immigration. The visas in the US around education are even more liberal than they are for STEM jobs (which IMO is a bit exaggerated online), there's less or no cap limits in edu and the organizations can sponsor people easier than companies. IT abuse is the big ticket item while no one really talks about education. Both need better enforcement.
>credentials required There are no credentials required. >authoritatively say Experience beats credentials. >qualified labor pool No degree required outside of a HR checklist. CS students are not necessarily qualified outside of academia in the real world. H-1B just means you jumped through the hoops of credentialism to be a "qualified" candidate. Many universities require you to have a CS degree to work as an tech employee, so they shut out many qualified candidates. Their loss, and eventual downfall. >Do you think the deep engineering knowledge and practices to solve hard problems is overrated? Yes, extremely overrated. The emergence of AI is at least proof that "deep engineering knowledge" can be easily summoned by a prompt. The practices are on their way to automation. The hard work has been done.
•
> The emergence of AI is at least proof that "deep engineering knowledge" can be easily summoned by a prompt. Gee, I wonder what the academic backgrounds of the theorists and engineers who made that possible is. Probably no advanced degrees and no people on sponsorships right?
Born in San Francisco at Mt. Zion, now Zuckerberg Chan, to parents and grandparents born in Berkeley. What have immigrants ever contributed… looks around… oh. Why stop at nationality. California for Californians! Pretty bad take.
•
We don't want any more immigrants, and we don't care whether they contribute or not.
I'm reluctant to verify my identity or age for any online services (neilzone.co.uk)
•
the fight for privacy was lost in the 90s, it's time to move on
•
most websites know exactly who you are, who you live with, and what things you like. profiling is not just a luxury enjoyed by government
The only way I can think of to do this completely anonymously (at least for the government and social media) is for you to buy a card in cash that has a little code on it. You'd need your ID to buy it, and you'd put your code into your operating system and things that demand age verification can ask the OS whether or not you're over 18. Alternatively, you can give the service your code to verify your age, but that would be less convenient and lead to a larger tracking footprint, so it likely wouldn't be used unless necessary
•
Can I buy them for my underage friends at different stores? Is there revocation and hence a database that maps codes to identities? How are the codes minted? Can I pretend to be a gas station and buy a big pack of ID cards, then just not check ID?
> They want your real ID. They do not need it. I think that is exactly backwards. Many of the companies integrating with KYC/AML providers (such as my company) definitely don't want to be dealing in ids, just like most companies don't want to be dealing in storing credit card numbers (and the compliance that goes along with it). Its why Stripe exists, and its why ID verification companies exist.
•
I'd like to agree, but I don't. If companies didn't want to be involved, they would aggressively be pushing governments to provide ways to confirm age w/o transmitting any other data. Primarily because you can't leak data you never had in the first place. I don't see that happening.
Remember that just typing 'John Smith DOB 1/1/1900' into a random webform and clicking submit to get in is technically wire fraud. Sure, it usually won't be prosecuted... Until you upset the wrong person and they're looking for a crime you did...
•
Fraud (Wikipedia, United States): - Misrepresents a material (non-trivial) fact in order to obtain action or forbearance by another person - The other person relies upon the misrepresentation - The other person *suffers injury* as a result of the act or forbearance taken in reliance upon the misrepresentation. Damages in fraud cases is normally computed using - Recovery of damages in the amount of the *difference between the value of the property* had it been as represented and its actual value - Out-of-pocket loss, which allows for the recovery of damages in the amount of the *difference between the value of what was given and the value of what was received*. Usually also heavily implied it needs to involve money in some significant way: 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (...)'any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises'(...) Fraud cases also usually heavily apply burden of court practice on the prosecution, to prove fraud and substantial losses. If you type 'John Smith DOB 1/1/1900' the "victim" has to prove it caused them to suffer injury and that there was a significant difference between the value of the property (non-trivial).
I saw porn when I was under 18, and I'd wager the majority of people also have going back to the 70s or 80s. We all ended up mostly normal
•
<<Looks around>>> You call this normal?!?
I am in my mid forties, been working as a professional software developer for over 20 years. I click “accept the cookies” almost every time. I just personally don’t feel it’s worth the effort and cost to try to avoid it. What “dark pattern cookie trick” are you worried about? I just can’t come up with a scenario where it will actually harm me in any way. All the examples I have heard are either completely implausible, don’t actually seem that bad to me, or are things that are trivially easy to do even without any cookies. Now, I am not going around giving my real email out to random sites, though, although even that doesn’t strike me as particularly dangerous. I already get infinite spam, and I am sure there are millions of other ways to get my email address… it is supposed to be something you give out, after all. I just don’t think it is something that is worth stressing out about and fighting against. Maybe I am actually naive, but I just have not yet been convinced I should actually care.
•
Meanwhile I just bounce from the site 60% of the time. Most websites aren't needed for my survival, and I hope they are happy that they lost a customer while I go to their competitor. Moral of the story is: If you want me to see your content, and maybe spend money, don't cover up your content. Especially if you're not EU-based and not subject to GDPR, stop listening to the laws of some foreign country that doesn't control you.
•
[Reject Optional], [Essential Cookies Only] ... I am one of the people who clicks such options. But to some degree they are "privacy theater". Any website that presents you with such a choice is almost certainly loaded to the gills with tracking/analytics and various 3rd-party services that will track you with browser fingerprinting regardless of any buttons you click on the cookie banner. Nevertheless I still reject them, mostly out of spite.
First of all, if you don't practice any tracking limitation, you're almost certainly giving additional parties (directly or otherwise) access to your personal information. This is marketing data brokerage, this is the whole ballgame. To your point about the actual harm, I've come to see it as a kind of ecological problem. Wasting energy and sending more trash to a landfill doesn't harm me individually, at least not immediately. But it does harm in aggregate, and it is probably directly related to other general harms, like overall health outcomes, efficiency, energy costs, etc. No, accepting cookies by itself may not do much to me, but the broader surveillance and attention economy that relies on such apathy certainly has.
•
I turn off 3rd party cookies in the browser but I don't see first party cookies as big of a threat and I click accept just in case it breaks the website somehow.
Sadly, this still doesn't do anything to show me that I should opt out. I, as an individual, am not going to have any effect on a business if I opt out or not. No business decision is going to be made because I opt out. You might argue that it will matter if enough of us do it. Sure, that is true... but again, it won't matter if I do it or not. If N number of people opting out is enough to ruin the business model, then N-1 is surely enough as well. There is a 0% chance that I am the one who finally causes the system to collapse. I do use an ad blocker, and never click on ads. I feel like that action has a bigger return on investment than no clicking the cookie banner. If having more information about me allows the website to charge more to show me an ad, and I never click any ads, then I am hopefully helping decrease the return advertisers get by using personal information.
•
> Sadly, this still doesn't do anything to show me that I should opt out. Then don't. No need to be sad about it. > I, as an individual, am not going to have any effect on a business if I opt out or not. No business decision is going to be made because I opt out. I do it more from a point of view of principal. I don't want following around the Internet by all and sundry who care to, any more than I want to be followed down a dar alley, for followed into Tesco by someone yelling “hey, Dave, I saw you went to the pub last night, my shop has some cheap spirits” or “hey, Dave, I saw you but a network switch the other week, do you want another one?”. I also resist anything wrapped in many layers of dark patterns, and that describes almost all current ad tech. > You might argue that it will matter if enough of us do it. Sure, that is true... but again, it won't matter if I do it or not. If N number of people opting out is enough to ruin the business model, then N-1 is surely enough as well. There is a 0% chance that I am the one who finally causes the system to collapse. If your stats knowledge and reasoning accept that, then I've got an infinite compression scheme for you. It can compress anything including compressed anythings! You are jumping between two factors of large numbers haphazardly from sentence fragment to sentence fragment, and the logic isn't following you. At some point N-1 might make a difference, and you could be that -1. > I do use an ad blocker, and never click on ads. To use your argument on tracking: but many people don't, so why do you bother? What makes you think you could be the +1/-1 here but not there? And by blocking ads you are blocking a fair portion of the tracking, in fact that is why I block ads much more than the ads themselves. I don't run sponsorblock for the other side of the same reason: that doesn't affect tracking at all. > If having more information about me allows the website to charge more to show me an ad, and I never click any ads, then I am hopefully helping decrease the return advertisers get by using personal information. And when the database eventually leaks, many others will have the extra information about you. And again: by blocking the ads using most ad blockers (obs not all work the same ways) you are blocking at least some tracking. -------- But again, if you don't want to block tracking, don't. No need to be sad that we've not convinced you with our arguments as to why we try to block it. I know other devs who take your attitude (that is simply isn't worth their effort), and many others who take mine or similar (when it isn't worth the effort, the information or product behind the mountain of “legitimate interest” checkboxes isn't worth the effort either so I'll just move on). Our threat and principal models can be different from ours without either of us being bothered by the other's choices here.
I appreciate the list of potential harms. I'm curious about your last point though. Isn't it trivially easy to wipe cookies from your browser?
•
You should always configure your browser to automatically wipe all data on exit. The Arkenfox user.js user profile does this and more to mitigate fingerprinting.
You could use exactly the same argument for not bothering about doing things that pollute, generate landfill, or generally make things worse for society. Its highly unlikely your vote will swing an election. If you want easy things to do use cookie blocking extensions.
•
> You could use exactly the same argument for not bothering about doing things that pollute, generate landfill, or generally make things worse for society. Which is why those things need laws to create any meaningful change.
If not then install EFF Privacy Badger and Decentraleyes extensions.
•
uBlock is enough for all of that. I would minimize the number of extensions used, possibly to one (uBlock only).
I hear what you're saying, and instinctually I feel gross about it. But, if enabling advertising allows the website I'm visiting to stay in business, I think that might be a trade-off worth making.
•
The business model of the websites I visit is not my problem. I block ads and trackers at multiple levels, very aggressively, and could not care less if some websites disappeared because of it. Perhaps then we will be left with a more sane and useful subset of the Internet.
Don't become an engineering manager (newsletter.manager.dev)
•
Isn't being an engineering manager about leverage? Someone needs to organize people, allocate resources, or even decide the direction of products. We may say that ICs can make equally good such decisions, but every company has a hierarchy and someone does call the shots. And for better or for worse, some people are indeed good at navigating company dynamics and driving an organization forward, even though they may suck at building. An example would be IBM's Watson Jr. He was known for being awkward at mastering IBM tech as a salesperson. Even in a holacratic company like Zappos or Valve, some people still manage, right?
•
It's a bad idea to phrase advice as "Don't Do X", for most values of X that are often undertaken: - Don't move to Detroit - Don't go into academia - Don't use dating apps - Don't buy Google stock It's most obvious for the last one: you should buy Google (or any other) stock if you think it's underpriced and sell it if you think it's overpriced. But even for the other advice, a kind of Efficient Market Hypothesis holds. If there were a massive exodus of people from academia, causing universities to increase salaries and reduce administrative burdens, going into academia might be great for the right people. For many people Detroit is a terrible city, but I know a guy who worked for the Tigers, and bought a large house for a small amount of money, and did a lovely job renovating it, so Detroit worked well for him. Life is all about finding underpriced value: options that you will appreciate more than others, for whatever reason.
> The pace of change in the last year has been completely crazy, and it’s not stopping. > But even if you don’t give in to the constant FOMO - it’s impossible to argue that the way we worked hasn’t changed. Almost every part of our work looks different, and will continue to evolve. My experience is anecdotal, but this seems to be overblown. I'd say that almost every part of my work looks pretty identical to how it did a few years ago, and that the changes are relatively small in scope so far. Most of the arguments I've heard from those who advocate adopting AI tools are that the rate at which the tools are improving is exponential (or super-exponential, or whatever), which is a prediction about how it will change rather a claim that it has already reached a point that it's necessary. I don't pretend to have any expertise that lets me evaluate those predictions better than anyone else, but unless I happen to be a severe outlier, it seems like gross hyperbole to claim that every part of our work has already changed.
•
Yes. Also there's a weird thing going on where the claims are simultaneously that these tools are super easy to use and everyone and their dog is going to be using them to create awesome software and that it's only going to get easier to do so BUT ALSO that you have to immediately start using them or you'll get left behind. Why should we start now if they're going to be more powerful and more accesible in a years time? seems like the effort working with the imperfect exising version will be wasted.
I cannot be alone in feeling that titles (within "tech" in particular) are almost completely arbitrary? What constitutes a "senior", "lead", "principal" and "staff" X, respectively, has so much overlap that it really depends on the organisation. I myself have been called all of those things, but have honestly not been able to tell the difference: in some cases, I have had much more responsibility as a "senior backend developer" than a "staff engineer". I have recently interviewed for a number of roles with titles like CTO, engineering manager, tech lead etc and there is so much overlap that they seem to be one and the same. Have worked at companies on three continents, in organisations ranging from 6 people to 10k+, so have seen a few titles.
•
Titles are meaningless. Many tech ICs at top companies have more influence and responsibility as well as pay than managers at low tier companies.
•
It’s how good you are at politics, that’s it. Big modifier if you’re tall and attractive.
•
I always think of the Gervais principle when it comes to titles - that they really just exist to provide illusory advancement and to get some of the minions to lord it over some of the other minions while the folks at the top of the organization benefit.
This is why I align on comp ranges rather than title. I've been a "Lead" where all I contributed was a new imaging pipeline and introducing NAT to the product line, a "Manager" of a failing company where I had no managerial authority or direct reports, and a "Senior" at a SV firm where I actually behaved a level above a Senior Engineer - owning outcomes, doing research, mentoring juniors, building relationships across silos, governance councils, etc. Titles are fungible, but your comp isn't. Don't let a company sell you on a better title for less comp, especially when the JD or role doesn't align with the title; the next place won't give a shit what your title was if all you did was Junior-level work because you bought into someone else's narrative rather than control your own.
•
I've worked with several "Directors" that all had between 0 and 3 reports. Vanity titles make people feel good and look nice on a resume, but that's about it.
There's a lot of cogs at big companies, but the impact of the entire company is huge. Startups usually have small impact. Usually at these big companies there's quite a few atlases holding the entire world up.
•
Sure also in big companies there are plenty of places for low performers to survive by owning some very small and rigid scope that doesn’t require any real end-to-end thinking. In my experience distribution of engineer quality is even across companies, countries, ages and any other dimension we can come up. Certain big scale skills can really only be practiced at honed at large tech companies, but it’s always a small minority that actually make those things happen. Resume alone can be an extremely misleading signal.
That may be your anecdote but CTO at a 30-50 person scale up would typically have much more management/accounting/signature/high-stake conversation/... experience than a senior developer at google.
•
When you swap between 9 hats, you don’t get meaningful experience at any of those roles. Instead you become a generalist which is only really needed at tiny organizations.
•
Yes. Which is why it's important to put scope on your resume. I can't know you ran a 30 person scale up unless you tell me. It doesn't have to be in those words exactly, usually it's tied to ARR or rounds raised or something you can easily talk about that translates across companies. I've seen resumes with titles like "Lead Engineer" who under that title put something like "Hired 45+ people to run <huge systems> at <company you've heard of>". That person has more scope than the 30-people CTO in your example :) PS: 30 people isn't even that many for a whole company. That's a Series A startup with early signs of product-market-fit. It's common to see a ratio of 10 employees for every 1 engineer in the company.
> In my experience staff engineer positions are even rarer then EM positions. Where do you work?!? If you are in Western Europe then the blogpost is irrelevant for you. The Western European market is weird.
•
Can you elaborate more about this? Why is it irrelevant in Western Europe?
MacBook Air with M5 (apple.com)
This is the best laptop for the general consumer around $1k. - it has no annoying fans, it is completely silent - a high res display with no PWM flickering and reasonable response times, no burn-in issues, enough brightness for outdoor use - best-in-class hardware, very very efficient, amazing single thread performance, good multi thread, very good GPU - no Microsoft Windows annoyances, ads, bloatware, broken stuff all the time - much better real world performance on battery than x64 processors (!). you can get reasonable perf by setting Intel/AMD CPUs to high perf, but then goodbye battery life and get ready for very loud fans. this is simply a point not emphasized enough, the real world battery perf of Intel/AMD laptops is very sluggish on default power modes and despite that, they consume more battery than the M5 - amazing battery life - good workmanship, no creaking, good hardware overall (mics, webcam, keyboard, touchpad!) - very good speakers There is simply nothing comparable in the Windows laptop world. You can maybe get a cheaper Windows laptop but it will be terrible in almost everything - the new Apple budget MacBooks will probably be a much better choice. And around $1000, there is no comparison. I wish it was different.
•
I have an M4 air. It’s a nice machine, but I do miss the non-reflective screen of my earlier Asus zenbook (similar size, weight, fanless, decent ergonomics, matte screen, but bog slow).
•
Apple makes great hardware. I kind of knew this when I was 12 and I had an Apple IIc. I'm 52 now.
•
Fully agree. I used to have a company issued MBP M3 Pro, and when I switched roles I got myself base M4 Air. Can't complain at all in the past year, I do feel throttling at times when running longer tasks, but for 99% of the time I don't feel I need anything better. And I do work as a software developer, so anyone doing lighter usage not in this camp will feel the same. M5 Air should be pretty much the same.
•
Even though I'm done with apple, every time I use a non-apple laptop I think "this is a shit trackpad".
Why the restriction to laptops? I don't get why prosumers would marry themselves 24/7 to a single portable device, when their conflicting requirements vary by task and circumstances: portability, high performance, low energy usage, and low noise aren't permanent requirements. Sure, there's no single device that has Apple's blend of attributes, but who need that in this age of VMs and broadband Internet? My 32-core HEDT workstation outperforms anything Apple branded. I have a Chromebook when I need to be unplugged (<10% or the time)
•
> but who needs that? I’m really happy with bringing my local workstation with me to a cafe, a coworking space, or on a trip. I love conveniently having one device for nearly everything, from AI fine-tuning to general development to gaming. And I love having a 12-hour battery life under normal use and USB-C charging. The screen is beautiful and great for watching movies on, too. If you want one computing device, in total, a MacBook is a great choice. It’s overkill in most areas for most people, but it’s not deficient for anyone , and that matters a lot.
•
> I’m really happy with bringing my local workstation with me to a cafe, a coworking space, or on a trip You can, with Tailscale. I edited my comment to remove how I occasionally remote, but I found out I typically don't do anything that needs more than 2 cores a a cafe.
•
> My 32-core HEDT workstation outperforms anything Apple branded Your high end hardware is not their target market / competition until you get into very purposeful tasks. The market segment that exists for Macbook Pro is one where competitors battery life sucks, windows isnt the preferred OS, and high performance on a portable device on battery is beneficial. Its one where they have acceptable performance vs a dedicated desktop but remain portable and a good expected lifespan, as a portable.
•
> Your high end hardware is not their target market / competition until you get into very purposeful tasks. Here's the kicker: it cost about the same as the highest end Macbook pro before the RAM madness. > The market segment that exists one where battery life sucks, windows isnt the preferred OS, and some high performance on a portable device on battery is beneficial. I agree the market exists, but think it's much smaller than it appears: most people do not work under these constraints most of the time; a cheap laptop + beefy desktop could do a better job in aggregate, wirh greater flexibility, especially for people who spend most of their time at the desk with their computer plugged in - which is most people. I suspect the portability requirement is sometimes aspirational, similar to the people who buy trucks overestimating the number of times they'll need to cary stuff on the truck bed.
> You can maybe get a cheaper Windows laptop but it will be terrible in almost everything It will be worse at almost everything, except running my preferred OS (Linux). Being able to upgrade/repair RAM, storage and battery at home is quite a perk too.
•
Not on the latest but I’m happily running Asahi NixOS
•
Even for the M1 generation feature support is not complete. Also, this a thread about current models. Asahi is still awesome though!
"it has no annoying fans" I beg to differ ;)
•
what is this, slashdot?
If this one is anything like the previous ones, ThinkPad is still beating it in the keyboard department. Plus you get x86_64 and vendor support for Linux. X13 is probably the best equivalent in Lenovo's line.
•
There's not much difference between the keyboard of the X13 Gen 6 and the keyboard of the MacBook Pro M1. I own both devices. The keyboard of my T14s Gen 1 on the other hand is noticeably better.
•
> X13 is probably the best equivalent in Lenovo's line. I think the X1 Carbon line is the best direct competitor.
How’s ACPI and real suspend (not that “fake” soft suspend) these days? I’m still burned after running Linux on a laptop since 2002 and not having proper power management for suspend :( … if it’s not the power layer, it’s the network, video, Bluetooth that won’t power up anymore after a nap
•
> How’s ACPI and real suspend On a current ThinkPad? Essentially perfect. Zero problems suspending and resuming, no matter what's going on, including weird cases like suspending while docked and resuming while undocked or vice versa.
And the fact that there is no annoying fan noise ever is just priceless. With the way most consumer laptops have their fan curves set, you open a new web page and get an annoying ramp up. It is not just a hardware thing, but mostly a self inflicted wound of having a fan curve that is way too aggressive.
•
If it's not aggressive then quickly laptop will be too hot to touch. For instance, I did tune the fan on my friend's laptop so that it wouldn't be waking up everyone for light browsing, but then it was getting uncomfortably hot. None of such issues on Macs.
Lemons do happen with Apple Silicon. I had a Mac Studio that would kernel panic on a semi-weekly basis. Apple Care put me through the reinstall OS / remove all external devices tap-dance for weeks, insisting that hardware was the last thing to suspect - before Apple Silicon, kernel panics were almost always hardware, particularly RAM. Ultimately I bought another Studio and swapped it in - kernel panics went away. With that evidence, Apple acknowledged the problem and exchanged my Studio for another one from the factory. I returned the swap unit within the 30 day window, so it didn't cost me anything but annoyance.
•
Needing to shell out... what? 2000 bucks to prove Apple Support they were wrong seems a very, very bad sign for that Support. Even if you got them back.
I'll upgrade my M1 MBA when they do. I remember my Intel MBP running noticeably hotter when plugged in on one side vs the other, so maybe it's trickier than it seems.
•
This was a limitation of intel CPU's at the time and required additional thunderbolt controller chips separate from the CPU.
oh no, absolutely- apologies for the confusion. Time "Machine" on MacOS continues to work (though it's clearly not as important to Apple as it once was). The issue is: if you want to back up a phone: it will take space from your laptop and it must be tethered to do the backup. This means that if you have a 1TiB phone, like I do, you need at least 1TiB of local disk on your laptop to be able to do a single backup if the phone is anywhere near full. This is in contrast to how Time Capsule works right now for MacOS, whereby you have an SMB share (like, a 100+TiB NAS) and your laptop will just back itself up when it can. Such a feature would be pretty killer on iPhones/iPads, or having a "photo server" to offload your photos... idk, but Apple won't do it.
•
I’ve been using Immich to offload photos, and it’s been working well so far.
Out of curiosity, what are some good use cases for a MBP now with the MBAs being so powerful? I can think of things like 4K video editing or 3D rendering but as a software engineer is there anything we really need to spend the extra money on an MBP for? I'm currently on a M1 Max but am seriously considering switching to an MBA in the next year or two.
•
The Apple Silicon fanless MBAs are great until you end up in a workload that causes the machine to thermal throttle. I tried to use an M4 MBA as primary development machine for a few months. A lot of software dev workflows often require running some number of VMs and containers, if this is you the chances of hitting that thermal throttle are not insignificant. When throttling under load occurs it’s like the machine suddenly halves in performance. I was working with a mess of micro services in 10-12 containers and eventually it just got too frustrating. I still think these MBAs are superb for most people. As much as I love a solid state fanless design, I will for now continue to buy Macs with active cooling for development work.
•
It's a personal thing how much you care, but the speakers on the MBPs are pretty amazing. The Air sounds fine, even good for a notebook, but the MBPs are the best laptop speakers I have ever heard.
Are there any non-Apple laptops yet where you can just close the lid and put the laptop in your bag and not worry about it being on?
•
Let me wax poetics here. Apple has been chasing the dream of the portable computer for so long, and has been at the forefront of the ultimate form factor of the personal computer, the laptop, since the early 90s. It's not surprising to me that the company that made an OS for everything, and a project to make an OS for everything, cannot figure out a reliable way to bring us a bicycle for the mind where you just close the lid. Only Apple has been laser-focused to give us this experience.
MacBook Pro with new M5 Pro and M5 Max (apple.com)
•
Does it still come with a measly 1 year warranty?
I love the following section of their copy: > Even More Value for Upgraders > The new 14- and 16-inch MacBook Pro with M5 Pro and M5 Max mark a major leap for pro users. There’s never been a better time for customers to upgrade from a previous generation of MacBook Pro with Apple silicon or an Intel-based Mac. I read as "Whoops we made the M1 Macbook Pro too good, please upgrade!" I think I will get another 2-5 years out my mine. Apple: If you document the hardware enough for the Asahi team to deliver a polished Linux experiene, I'll buy one this year!
•
>I read as "Whoops we made the M1 Macbook Pro too good, please upgrade!" >I think I will get another 2-5 years out my mine. I only own a M4 because the M1 had a hardware fault and I needed a replacement ASAP. (I sold the M1 after repair.) Although I'm glad to have a newer machine with longer future support, I have yet to notice any meaningful performance difference.
•
Please, please. I'd love to use it with Debian.
I downgraded today for the first time in my life. Sequoia is crazy fast in my MacBook Air m2 16gb Not upgrading any of my Macs ever again. I was a fanboy looking for every new update like a present, for 13 years, not anymore. It took one Tahoe burn all that trust. Never upgrading major OS versions on hardware from Apple again.
•
I think this could go equally for Windows as well, and many other software (not just OS). I purpose refrained from Tahoe because I didn't like the design but I wanted to know what the consensus was on it before upgrading. Apparently it's bad! Win 11 is bad compared to Win 10 as well. I'm fairly new to Linux so I can't really form an opinion there.
Love that they didn't learn anything from the touchbar.
•
They just didn't do anything with the touchbar. It could have actually been more useful. The removal of the esc key was pretty dumb though.
Qwen 3.5 35B-A3B and 27B have changed the game for me. I expect we'll see something comparable to Sonnet 4.6 running locally sometime this year.
•
Could be, but it likely won't be able to support the massive context window required for performance on par with sonnet 4.6
The only "push" towards Metal compatibility there's been has been complaints on github issues. Not only has none of the work been done, absolutely nobody in their right mind wants to work on Metal compatibility. Replacing proprietary with proprietary is absolutely nobody's weekend project. or paid project.
•
If coding by AI was truly solved then it would be done with AI, right?
Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR (apple.com)
•
I really can't believe they discontinued the Pro Display XDR.. what is wrong with them? A company the size of Apple, surely must have the resources to update it every couple of years.
•
DisplayPort 2.1 cannot reliably drive 6K at 120hz
The hardware is great, but the software is lacking. macOS only supports resolution-based scaling which makes anything but the default 200% pixel scaling mode look bad. For example, with a 27" 4K display many users will want to use 150% or 175% scaling to get enough real estate, but the image will look blurry because macOS renders at a higher resolution and then downscales to the 4K resolution of the screen. Both Windows and Linux (Wayland) support scaling the UI itself, and with their support for sub-pixel anti-aliasing (that macOS also lacks) this makes text look a lot more crisp.
•
I would love to see examples of this. I have a MBP and a 24" 4K Dell monitor connected via HDMI. I use all kinds of scaled resolutions and I've never noticed anything being jagged or blurry. Meanwhile in Linux the scaling is generally good, but occasionally I'll run into some UI element that doesn't scale properly, or some application that has a tiny mouse cursor. And then Windows has serious problems with old apps - blurry as hell with a high DPI display. Subpixel antialiasing isn't something I miss on macOS because it seems pointless at these resolutions [0]. And I don't think it would work with OLED anyway because the subpixels are arranged differently than a typical conventional LCD. [0] I remember being excited by ClearType on Windows back in the day, and I did notice a difference. But there's no way I'd be able to discern it on a high DPI display; the conventional antialiasing macOS does is enough.
Most-read tech publications have lost over half their Google traffic since 2024 (growtika.com)
•
Raises a few questions: 1. Is there still value in a trusted source of high quality, relevant information existing in an easily accessible place? To me the answer is obviously yes, whether a human writes it or an agent, and also whether a human consumes it or an agent 2. If an agent visits a page, they shouldn't generate ad revenue (I guess they don't? is that true?). Should they just be able to copy the information for free? If the answer to 1. is yes, the answer here should probably be no. 3. Does this completely break the ad revenue model that powers like the whole internet? 4. Does this seriously threaten our ability to maintain a high quality, shared collection of knowledge? What can be done?
The results seem plausible, but it's worth noting that the source of their data (Ahrefs) is just a rough estimate. Given that every publication they examined - including several outside of the tech industry - showed declines, I'd hope they would confirm that it's not an artifact of the estimation process. Ahrefs themselves caution against using their data to make these sorts of conclusions: >While these estimates don’t, and can’t, show you exactly how much organic traffic a website gets, they work incredibly well for comparison. For example, it’s fantastic for learning if your competitors’ websites get more or less organic search traffic than your own. ( https://help.ahrefs.com/en/articles/1863206-what-is-organic-traffic-in-ahrefs-and-how-do-we-calculate-it )
•
Conde nast reported in the last few days their Web traffic is massively down too. Other big publishers have reported it themselves too. The web and SEO are dead.
> NerdWallet is publicly traded (NRDS) and its business depends on converting search visitors into financial product referrals. It went from 25M monthly organic visits to 6.8M, a 73% decline. The above refers to the time until Jan 2026. Here are its financials: Year Total Revenue Operating Expenses Net Income 2025 $836.6 ~$708.0 $48.7 2024 $687.6 $614.7 $30.4 2023 $599.4 $541.8 ($11.8) 2022 $538.9 $518.1 ($10.2) 2021 $379.6 $390.1 ($42.5) It doesn't look like the lower traffic, if true, has hit the bottom line yet.
•
They've done a great job capturing their audience into their app. I used to work for one of their top competitors, and they've been decimated.
I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project (twitter.com)
I tried AltPower Search and it exhibits the same issue as Google. I think you might just need to give it more time to index. Nanoclaw.dev has only been available for a week. Then, it's the lower relative reputation of the 'dev' vs. the 'net' domain ... [1]: https://altpower.app [2]: https://web.archive.org/web/20260000000000*/https://nanoclaw.dev/ [3]: https://radar.cloudflare.com/tlds
•
this thing is just google with a theme
A year ago I would have agreed but lately, when it comes to stuff linked off of HN, it's actually more likely to be clear and readable if it's AI written.
•
I don't find the LLM written stuff very readable because after one too many "real"s or "The X Dilemma" my brain shuts off. It's not even voluntary, it just does that on its own.
In particular, if you license it MIT, and it's useful, expect Amazon to make a fork, not give you the source code, and each tens of millions of dollars from it while you don't get a cent. There's writing code for charity, and then there's this . Charity wasn't meant to include hyper-corporations.
•
> if you license it MIT, and it's useful, expect Amazon to make a fork, not give you the source code, thats why the gpl family of license exist. MIT/BSD family licenses are do whatever you want with this, if you want to make money off of you pet opensource project I recommend multi-license it with a copyleft with copyright assignment required for contributions and offer other licenses with a fee.
If you want evil megacorps to give you money when they use your thing, maybe say "if you're an evil megacorp you have to give me money when you use my thing" in the license? If your license reads "hey, you can use this however you want, no matter who you are, and don't have to give me money", people will use it however they want, no matter who they are, and won't give you money. Unfortunately, for decades, free software fanatics have bullied inexperienced and eager programmers, who don't know any better into believing that an actual sustainable development model that respects their work is evil and that we should all work for free and beg for donations.
•
What if they simply use the code and don't give you the $$$? Are you going to sue them?
•
The idea that software that is free NEEDS to be open source because "I don't want something running on my computer" but then will go and download the precompiled binary hurts my head alot
With the cloud, GPL won’t protect you either
•
AGPLv3 largely does, if you can and do enforce it in some way when breaches happen.
Nope. Stallman helped create this mess. Free software underpins all the infrastructure of surveillance capitalism.
•
It underpins all software, and has wormed its way into Windows. I'm not sure this is as good a point as you think.
Publicly defending pedophilia arguably isn't “right”, but if you restrict Stallman's positions to software licensing, then I'd agree with you.
•
I keep hearing this. Please quote Stallman's quote where he defends pedophilia. Not a quote of someone else saying that Stallman defends pedofilhia, but a quote by Stallman himself.
Tell that to my spouse who, at age 14, was given his contact card by him directly.
•
I wish at 14 I had people of such integrity around me.
•
I'm not following - are you implying that handing a contact card to someone is a sexual pass? Or is it only considered sexual when the recipient is underage?
 Top