HN user
We had an incredible run with Zamund, RARBG and Arena. I’m still salty because I spent 15 years building up my ratio by repurposing old PCs as seed boxes even when I was a kid living with my parents. Too bad our govt is focused on piracy instead of the plethora of other cybercrimes that Bulgarians fall victim to on the daily.
But far from demanding more electricity personal computers have become more efficient with laptops mostly replacing large standalone boxes, and software improvements reducing waste.
If only it was true, I reckon we’re using multiple-orders of magnitude more computational per $ of business objectives simply because of the crazy abstractions. For example, I know of multiple small HFT firms that are crypto market makers with their trading bots in Python. Many banks in my country have excel macros on top of SQL extensions on top of COBOL. We’ve not reduced waste in software but rather quite the opposite.
I don’t think this is super relevant to the articles point but I think it’s an under discussed topic.
It’s quite upsetting that if you want a modern car so that you utilise the newest advances in safety, you have to consent to constant tracking, enshitification, subscription services, etc. It would be really cool if you could get something like a ‘67 impala that doesn’t make ‘67 emissions and has actual seatbelts and airbags…
$0 in rewards for RCE on the Windows build servers is crazy. I understand he didn’t find an actual zero-day, only a configuration issue, but still. Imagine the global havoc you can cause if you can pollute the build environment with backdoored DLLs…
I’m ashamed to admit we have a discord channel for each project and we dump secrets there with access control to the channels based on who works on the project.
It’s peak startup opsec.
The README itself is also very much in the style of ChatGPT. It loves the to overuse rhetorical questions.
What I find most interesting is that it apparently didn’t trigger their content filters which, at least previously, were also blocking piracy stuff.
Kernel level packet filtering to avoid Spotify ads is about the same level of mental gymnastics as the GPT-generated “we’re not pirates” argument in their README.
While Spotify is obviously an immoral company, you, the person reading this, are not entitled to free 24/7 cloud-streamed music on demand. They are a business and they don’t owe that service to you on principle.
If you don’t like them as a company, there’s way to purchase the music directly (remember how we all used the iTunes Store back in the day) and there are other streaming services whose morals you might find more acceptable.
To be clear, I’m not making some grand “piracy is evil” argument, but I’m saying that to publish software enabling piracy with the justification that a business’ free service is not good enough value for you is a bit out there.
Taken straight from the new regulation: “Providers of internet search engine services are not required to implement age assurance measures for end-users who are not account holders.”
How can you argue any of this is NOT in the interest of centralised surveillance and advertising identities for ADULTS when there’s such an easy way to bypass the regulation if you’re a child?
Is there a write up on how you deal with the captchas?
great job on zod. it’s an incredible library. also really excited about the locale errors. finally I can push the zod errors directly to the frontend. would love to take responsibility for the BG locale.
at the very least that article was definitely edited with ChatGPT. i had someone on my team write “edgy” copy with ChatGPT last week and it sounded exactly the same. short paragraphs and overuse of bullet points are also a dead giveaway. i don’t think it’s super noticeable if you don’t use ChatGPT a lot but for the people that use these systems daily, it’s still very easy to spot.
my suggestion to OP: this was interesting material, ChatGPT made it had to read. use your own words to explain it. most people interested in this deeply technical content would rather read your prompt than the output.
I’m not sure how the solution to “LLMs lie” is “more LLM”. I’ve personally had o3 tell me stuff like: “I ran this query against version 0.10 of DuckDB and verified that it works” when the query contains functions that don’t exist in DuckDB or “this version gets better PageSpeed Insights results” when I know it can’t check those. It happens surprisingly often and it’s super obvious. However, it’s made me seriously wary of the information that it gives which I can’t verify purely based on logic.
Born too early for Y2K, but just in time for the Epochalypse lol
If you google “how does a plane generate lift”, the first result you get is a link from nasa.gov which claims that lift is generated this way. Kind of funny considering the SE question includes a screenshot of another NASA resource claiming this is false.
Very good article. I try to (respectfully) push my coworkers in this direction but it’s a bit of a lost cause.
I work mostly on small codebases and you can smell unchecked AI codegen from a mile away. Even small changes become giant refactors.
People who push this have never had to work in such codebases. God forbid your requirements change mid project. Rarely does the sum of separate prompts without full context result in something maintainable and modifiable. You’re cooked.
This is an absolutely false equivalency. There’s no decision making, design consideration, architecture, real problem solving, etc. when doing long multiplication.
I think the main difference is that it’s a fully set up installable ISO of Fedora Atomic XFCE with the theme and other tweaks preloaded which is a convenient thing to have, I guess. Also they do credit Chicago95 pretty much at the top of the README.