HN user

Supermancho

4,203 karma
Posts0
Comments3,248
View on HN
No posts found.

If OpenCode is so terrible it wouldn't be the base

Ignoring the appeal to authority inherent to this kind of statement, it's ignoring another implication. Large companies can afford to maintain a fork. Using the latest release of OpenCode day to day is a different proposition than serving as some corporate developmental branch "base", as shorthand for all sorts of changes/usage.

This post is chock-full of soft ideas. They make no meaningful steps toward "a harness that can do anything". The suggestion is to replace a small node application with specific tooling, with a vm "to give it more capabilities". This is what Agent sandboxes are, already. Making the sandbox the harness, doesn't achieve a concrete goal.

GPT-5.6 13 days ago

The outputs, ui, and overall behavior (tokenization) are not identical.

>>> ... too large to interact with T cells.

>> Also, unfortunately, a result that industry and the anti-regulation crowd will use to say microplastics are harmless.

> also, asbestos is too small to interact with T-cells, so it must be safe.

It's not really analogous.

Ironically, this is missing the point. They were commenting on flawed reasoning. This shouldn't need to be spelled out, as it's part of the conversation context.

Sometimes "dunking" comments are a variation on https://www.instagram.com/p/DY2DRKDhqaa - where everyone is arguing about who is wrong, because they aren't treating it like a conversation.

You're assuming that this guy was actually being prosecuted for crimes or that this guy lacked loyalty to Xi Jinping

That's not an "or" question, imo. If you threaten the king by having too much power, too many allies, or too keen a mind, you get moved off the board. Disloyalty and risk of disloyalty are both abhorrent to autocrats.

I think this is overly simplistic. Trump 2.0 was certainly the catalyzing event, but the issue is one of US political failure. Europe could have forgiven a corrupt regime that had an opportunity to be changed out, and was, when it became destructive to European interests. However, there is no recourse today. The US political system has demonstrated that it's corruptible and toothless in the face of authoritarian overreach, regardless of the systemic support that had to be in place for the administration to be so effectively destructive. This is the issue that is irreversible, in the long term. An authoritarian will rise again in the US, sooner rather than later.

Lots of nerds for some reason have made cynicism a personality trait. They think optimism/honesty is hopelessly naive, therefor cynicism is the correct default.

It is the result of experience. Working with and creating systems (even embarrassingly simple ones), then seeing them fail in a myriad of ways more often than succeeding, colors your expectations about throwing humans into the mix.

Children learn to lie as part of their natural development, but do not always externalize that until faced with media (Airheads candy commercial or equivalent). Either way, honesty is expected as a default for utility and not an expectation in leveraging goals.

LLMs are probabilistic by design so running the same prompt multiple times will give you different results.

Reasonably deterministic is the phrase. If I can be sure the LLM is giving me back the same result 99% of the time I need it, that's reasonable for me. Maybe this is not reasonable for others.

ie How often will an LLM get 2+2 wrong? Now expand until you're uncomfortable.

In the US, most people don't their shopping near the office. In Renton (commute into Seattle), it was commute to and from, then optionally local grocery stores to and from. WFH has dramatically reduced our driving which is a bonus over time saved.

It's a casualty of political corruption, both moral in terms of Party first politics and run-of-the-mill crony capitalism. That's what it means.

The consequences are far reaching for many existing industries. It may never be unraveled once initiated. It will give rise to more concentrated wealth and power. This is by design.

>> show me something that has become so critical in your day that if I took it away tomorrow, your work would actually fall apart

> Of course I could still do my job if AI disappeared tomorrow

So then you agree with TFA, it’s not so critical that if taken away your work would not fall apart.

That's ungracious, at best. Your interpretation is something close to the death of the position, while theirs is the moderate interpretation of "causes chaos".

My style of online participation has been shaped by 2 ideas:

1. I rarely fully understand my own positions on minutia 2. Writing is rewriting.

I write forum posts to solidify my understanding of my own interests, beliefs, and reasoning. I often edit them multiple times before moving on and ignoring the responses thereafter. I can reference them and have to other people who ask my opinion. Sometimes I do respond back to replies immediately, and sometimes I revisit days later, after I've had time to put it in my day-to-day context. It's not a hard and fast rule.

Posting stopped being about convincing someone else maybe 20 years ago (around age 30). I do post to look back and understand myself. To others, I'm sure this sounds like existential navel-gazing and self-centered blathering, but I don't mind.

I did say what I mean explicitly.

it comes out sideways in other dimensions

current moral programming

Not one of these words holds meaning in context. If it were only the phrases, there might be some grounded message. Each word and phrase seems to be code for a concept attached to your specific mental model.

People tend not to have discussions with other people who cannot grasp what they are, or are not, saying. I would guess and engage further, but assuming what you are saying is unfair and leads to the tired case of Humpty Dumpty versus Alice. Words mean what one side says they do, as a way to avoid exchange.

Citizens United got pretty close in the Supreme Court's 5–4 decision on January 21, 2010, ruling that corporations and unions cannot be prohibited from making independent political expenditures, citing First Amendment free speech protections.

The models get cheaper super fast. By this time next year Fable 5 will cost less than Sonnet does today.

I'm not sure that's something to rely on. I would be Fable 5 will be phased out and the bleeding edge will be priced up.

I use a Godot MCP in addition to my Godot IDE and the Figma MCP

The Godot Engine API (100s of calls) is not worth memorizing and Figma is visual based, along with a complicated engine-specific serialization.

Much easier to ask an LLM to find out why one thing affects another or how to optimally generate a specific change by exploring those APIs. When the LLM eventually fails, to explain the available functions and triage a solution.

Yes, the person I responded to asked, and yes, I was the only person who answered. You're welcome?

I don't think you understand what's happening. I accepted that I lacked the proper context. You want to keep arguing about related details.

Edit: and the politicalization of it continues... sigh

You felt the need to politicize it by intentionally phrasing that it was "inflicted" to get an optional vaccination because there were consequence to opting out. This is not adding to the discussion, so here you are. Hope this helps.

UK during the COVID-19 pandemic of 2021, when public health campaigns urged people to "get the jab."

Asked and answered, ty.

The term was popularized the US during the pandemic as well. It seemed like it was used by conservative media in the US to try to further politicize vaccination as something being inflicted on them.