HN user
I think the editor themselves misunderstood the conjecture.
UPD: The edit got reverted and there's this on the talk page now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jacobian_conjecture#c-DaR...
UPD2: There are edit wars happening now: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jacobian_conjectu... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jacobian_conjecture#c-Sea...
Don't post generated text or AI-edited text. HN is for conversation between humans.
Sorry, but gaslighting others that you haven't used an LLM to write your comments when you obviously have is incredibly dishonest.
Not even talking about the actual content on the website, OP - why are all of your comments here LLM-generated?
It's extremely clear you're not writing those yourself, which makes the whole thing very disingenuous if you can't engage with others in your own language.
Some caveats since this crowd will rightly push on them
Maybe you should start by not writing your HN posts with an LLM..
To be fair, when they reset usage for everyone (instead of a banked reset), they move your reset back a week later, so:
1. Your window ends (usage reset) in 3 days
2. They reset usage for everyone
3. Your usage goes back to 100% and your current window ends in 7 days now.
API pricing itself might have extreme margins compared to the real cost. Anyway, in my testing the Pro 20x $200 plan gives you about $2200 API-equivalent weekly usage if you're only using GPT 5.6 Sol, so quite close to $9k-$10k/month API-equivalent, it's a bit inconsistent with cache costs.
It's very interesting that for Anthropic the $100 and $200 plans only differ 2x in weekly limits, the 5 hour limit differences are more severe. But for OpenAI, Pro 20x is, well, 4x of Pro 5x for only 2x cost. So, for example, 100% of weekly usage for Codex on a Plus ($20) account is just 5% of weekly usage for Codex on Pro 20x.
And you can calculate how much extra usage you can get from resets, and especially banked resets by purposefully using the whole quota and using your banked reset - they expire 30 days after they're given out, so if you don't use one, it just disappears.
I don't think it's just the docs that are LLM written.
Was there a reason to add an AI-generated image to the top of the article? :(
More details:
- https://platform.kimi.ai/docs/guide/kimi-k3-quickstart
- https://platform.kimi.ai/docs/pricing/chat-k3
1M context, pricing is $3/$15 for 1M tokens (cache $0.3), which is extremely high for a Chinese open-weight model, but if it's truly competitive with most of the current frontier and is only behind Fable/Sol, the pricing is justified.
This is 1:1 pricing of Anthropic's Sonnet series (except Sonnet 5 which is currently on discount), and very close to 5.6 Terra pricing (Terra's input is $2.5).
One thing to consider, though: reasoning efficiency matters directly for how expensive a model actually is in real use. GPT's models are extremely reasoning efficient, and some Claude models like Fable at lower effort are as well. So if Sol spends 10K reasoning tokens to do something (at $30/1M) vs Kimi K3 that spends 50K reasoning tokens, Sol would win on cost effectiveness.
Direct link to the registry to verify the domain status (JSON): https://rdap.identitydigital.services/rdap/domain/t.me, Ctrl+F for "server hold"
The "serverHold" status is not set by GoDaddy, but by the actual .ME registry https://domain.me/
GoDaddy could apply "clientHold" but not "serverHold"
It might be working fine for you if the DNS server you're using hasn't propagated this change yet. The Google DNS server has: https://dns.google/query?name=t.me&rr_type=A&ecs=
Suspended means the "serverHold" status. I haven't found any official blog post/announcement yet, but the status is unambiguous, and the fact that it happened to one of the Telegram's main short links means that it might be related to legal matters.
Yeah, Anthropic's current tokenizer in Sonnet 5/Opus 4.8/Fable 5 is much worse than OpenAI's. Also, OpenAI has been using their current o200k_base from the day GPT-4o came out over two years ago. Just a few of my own tests:
- A ~2000-2002 legacy C++ game codebase at about ~90kloc: GPT 1.12M, Claude 2.2M
- A ~30kloc TypeScript codebase: GPT 260K, Claude 437K
In the end, GPT's current tokenizer is ~1.6x-2x better than Claude's current one, depending on your data. And you can check for free for both, for OpenAI just use the open-source libraries, for Anthropic - you have to use their count_tokens endpoint as they don't publish the tokenizer, but the endpoint is free (and allows requests over 1M tokens as well).
It's kind of funny to be reading this:
I had Claude Code create mine: I told Claude, more or less: I want to archive, Developer ID-sign, notarize, staple, and install this app to /Applications without ever opening Xcode. Write me a script that does the whole chain and fails loudly if any step breaks.
Even though the text we're reading is Claude talking to us as well :)
Also it was weird to see the mention of "ask your LLM" at almost every stage in the blog post:
point Claude Code or your LLM coding tool of choice to this blog post, and let it figure it out
When in doubt, ask your LLM of choice about them and have it help you get set up. It’s the one that’s going to be using Xcode for you anyway.
The whole point of using the LLM in the first place is to avoid doing things manually that you don’t want to do.
Again, if in doubt, ask Claude Code or your LLM of choice to create this for you.
Again, this is why you talk to your LLM, tell it what you want, and have it help build your workflow.
I think in this case the tool was sending the contents of the entire folder it was started in, no matter what files the LLM actually read.
No one else mentioned it in the thread, but this is not a new promotion. It's an existing promotion that's being extended. In their own words:
From May 13, 2026 through July 19, 2026, your weekly usage limit in Claude Code is 50% higher. 5-hour usage limits are not affected by this promotion.
The pricing is insane: $1.25/$4.5 for 1M tokens, and $0.15 for cached input!
https://dev.meta.ai/docs/getting-started/pricing-rate-limits
To be honest, I'm also leaning this way, especially because of the hardcore anti-AI stance, so much that Zig will close security vulnerability issues on Codeberg if you mention that they were found with LLMs. I don't think that this is a good approach.
You can't do "redesigning the existing Zig code in a way that eliminates not only the current bugs but also prevents similar ones from happening in the future" without actually changing Zig itself.
But Rust is exactly the tooling that gives humans and LLMs a lot of those checks for free, and things like RAII.
It feels like the first half of blog post is less of "thoughts on the Bun Rust Rewrite" and more "I don't like Jarred, he's a bad programmer and manager".
Maybe I'm wrong, but it strongly feels this way. I'm not saying that Andrew is right or wrong, it's just that you could throw out most of the first half of the post and not lose anything actually on topic.
But having graduated from the Thiel Fellowship school of thought rather than university, he was essentially groomed from a young age into uncritically embracing the Silicon Valley mindset, and he took venture capital.
Jarred was a stinky manager. Poor communication, unrealistic expectations, low empathy, no experience. Just a total shit show, from an employment perspective.
Jarred was already writing slop well before he had access to LLMs
Sonnet 5 is a huge token hog, though, it uses far more reasoning tokens than Opus models while being priced at $2/$10 with promo, and $3/$15 (usual Sonnet price) afterwards.
The model is available through Cursor which has $20, $60 and $200 plans. I assume the $60 version might work better for you?
I think it should be available through Cursor?
EDIT: Tested myself, it's actually NOT available from EU. But with a Swiss VPN it works :)
Was this in Claude Code for Claude? Did you use a weaker model like Haiku? Claude should absolutely not be as bad as you said.
We don't yet know Terra's results for DeepSWE/TerminalBench though.
It seems to be extremely economical - 4x better reasoning efficiency compared to Opus while being priced at $2/$6. For comparison, GPT 5.4 is $2.5/$15, GPT 5.5/5.6 are $5/$30, Opus 4.8 is $5/$25, Fable is $10/$50.
And by benchmarks (unless they gamed them), seems to be at around Opus 4.7 level, which is what Elon mentioned in https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2074911038286295049.
I guess the Cursor data was very useful.
Seems to be found as a part of Patch The Planet [0] which is basically OpenAI giving model access and Trail of Bits using them to find vulnerabilities in OSS projects.
Honestly it's a bit of a shame. I checked and they could've shortened their base64 payload by 304 chars by removing all comments except the top two congratulatory ones, or by 524 if they removed those too.