HN user
Hi
While I appreciate you taking the time to reply, I'm interested in the particulars of what constitutes security in New Reddit.
It seems we both agree, though, that Old Reddit is not long for this world. Which I find regrettable.
While most of the rant was indeed about their posturing (which I personally would not call "politics" but we need not debate semantics here if I understood you well enough), even putting that aside I wasn't able to find strong evidence of the "security measures" you speak of.
If you're more familiar with the mechanisms by which New Reddit defends itself against scraping, I'm happy to issue a correction --- especially so if it can be explained why Old Reddit cannot offer such a defense.
Besides scraping, this probably has implications for posting as well. Do you like reading comments from humans and not from other bots? Well, in that case a system that uses plain html will be easier to automate with bots than a javascript clusterfuck.
Commenting has --- as far as I remember --- required an account on Reddit, and Old Reddit is still accessible behind a login. So in the future when they do sunset Old Reddit, they can use this argument. I will still not really buy that they simply had to remove Old Reddit because of it, but whatever, I kind of doubt I'll even see the notice.
You can't have the cake of web 1.0 and the eat-it of a botless experience too.
Alas.
It seems you're viewing this from the perspective of Reddit-the-company, and if your interests are to maximize profits then I don't really disagree with what you have to say.
I miss Reddit-the-communities, personally, whose interests as you observe seem to conflict with those of Reddit-the-company.
Then they should nuke Old Reddit rather than offer a wishy-washy "we're being scraped" explanation. My beef is that under all of the layers of PR this ultimately comes down to an engineering liability --- which is not my problem. If they can't deal with *their* problem, don't pretend like it's *my* problem.
I'm even fine with them saying "because old.reddit.com is used by scrapers, we're locking it down" which I would still contest the need to do when other sites can use e.g. Anubis, but I probably wouldn't write a rant about it.
Referring to old Reddit as plain, safe HTML is not an accurate characterization.
To be pedantic, it is accurate, but missing context. Please forgive me for doing the same thing the Reddit PR team has done, I am not so morally just.
Arguments aside, this is a touchy spot for me because I really do view my time spent on Reddit positively, and seeing where it has gone makes me feel all sorts of unpleasant emotions.
It's being rolled out only to some people, as noted elsewhere in this thread (https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026/06/reddit-will-require-...). Sorry, I neglected to mention/link to this news article.
The 2s delay before response smells of rate-limiting to me! I don't remember it ever being so slow before, but then again I don't use Reddit anymore.
Unless their servers are being hit so hard by scrapers they can't stand up straight...
The business model where a company owns a public community and monetizes through ads and search traffic seems to have just been a failed model.
A failure in what sense? That they can't pay the bills or that they can't see the VC-desired 10X ROI? Because my impression (as a layperson) is that the Reddit of yore could have stayed afloat from ad revenue + user donations, but it wasn't turning a huge profit. Anyone else remember the sidebar with the quota for Reddit gold for server costs? I don't remember it being short that often...
They also don't work on old.reddit much at all these days, so any effort they have to put in to handling bot traffic is kept to one route.
I neglected to editorialize this part, but I suspect this is because *they don't have to*. I don't doubt that there are some new things on Reddit that people like, but Reddit was functionally complete as a place to interact with other people when it was launched.
I'm not an internet historian, but sites akin to Reddit have existed for a long time, and my understanding is that it happened to take over when the last forum aggregator died for whatever reason.
It's being rolled out only to some people, as noted elsewhere in this thread (https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026/06/reddit-will-require-...). I neglected to mention/link to this news article.
I hope the day never comes that you are booted off, however.
I know I'm not arguing with you personally here since it seems we both have a bone to pick with Reddit, but I don't understand why they can't use Anubis or whatever captcha thing I may or may not have seen on New Reddit. It irks me that they've decided they will keep hosting it (for now), but they're just going to close the gate.
And dang it, I swear to god they put in a 2s rate-limit on the page, which it seems they have left in after the transition (perhaps because it's being rolled out still, although they could be so kind as to not rate-limit me now that I've logged in). Was that all they tried??
Are you making a counterpoint to the author's premise that smart glasses are an "intolerable intrusion?"
I'm having trouble understanding the purpose of your comment since it seems like you're just saying the ray ban glasses are bad for a different reason.
Not the original commenter, but I have faced similar friction from people who are not grandmas or quarterbacks. I don't particularly agree with its tone, but I agree with the original commenter's general message.
I won't be so confident to identify what it is, but there is something that causes "end users" to bristle at Zulip.
Where I'm coming from, everyone uses Slack. I spearheaded an effort to switch to Zulip because our Slack server is on a free plan and our messages get sucked into the void after 60 days now. Everyone agrees that this is bad, and that we don't have the money for Slack premium (we're an academic organization, so AFAICT we wouldn't even have to self-host to avoid paying), and yet so many people do not want to switch. Here are some common responses I've gotten:
* I refuse to use another messaging app and Slack is nonnegotiable for some of my collaborators.
* I don't want to learn a new UI.
* I don't want to learn a new UI that isn't basically the same as Slack.
* I will only switch if everyone else switches.
This is half a social problem ("I will only be receptive if everyone is using this"), but I do think there is some legitimate friction in Zulip's UI. I am fairly confident that we could successfully switch to Zulip if the Slack dissenters could be convinced to use Zulip --- or if Zulip could somehow be coerced into being more Slack-like.
As the "agent of change" at my organization, I felt like the resources Zulip provides are lacking in what I really need. Like I know there are technical details on how to move to Slack (https://zulip.com/help/moving-from-slack), but what I really need is help with the above: convincing people to try and acclimate to the UI. And yeah, I kind of agree that a 2 minute video on how to use Zulip is not the resource I need since it presupposes a degree of openness and cooperation that I don't have access to.
These are somewhat disorganized thoughts, but happy to expand upon anything if you're interested. I really do want to successfully move our org to Zulip since I'm tired of our messages disappearing.
Cool stuff! I'm not as lucky to be surrounded by (affordable) fresh, seasonal produce, but I'll keep your seasonality tip in mind. We do have farmers' markets where I am, although their prices are unfortunately at a bit of a premium. Maybe I'll just buy some quantity of whatever's freshest one of these days and try to improvise as you do.
LMK if there's a mailing list or something I can get on for your mom's book!
adopting instead, the diet of my great grandparents: Plants; local, seasonal and whole.
I saw some mention of the same on the website for the farm. Care to share any recipes? Or even just names of dishes? I quite enjoy foods from the Mediterranean and I'm interested in trying more!
Nothing of actual utility:
I don't really see there being much of a difference between the modeling surprises and last-minute surprises only uncovered when the program runs. If the gist of what you're saying is that an experienced proof engineer should have fewer modeling surprises than an experience software engineer has last-minute code execution surprises, then I can sort of agree. But the "contours" of a proof you're describing are basically analogous to decomposing an application into individual components (modules/functions) --- and if you do this and test your components you should expect your software to not have any "last minute surprises" except for modeling failures as well.
I guess the point I mostly disagree with is the feasibility of what you describe here:
In particular, if you get definitions right and if your plan actually makes sense mathematically (i.e. the proof is possible using your planned breakdown), you have a much more linear sense of progress.
This presupposes that you know how the proof should be written, which means that you not only have an understanding of the proof mathematically (whatever your definition of "mathematically" is), but you ALSO know how to warp that understanding into a machine proof. The author notes that the "getting the definitions right" part is slower than them writing out the definitions themselves for a variety of reasons which ultimately mean they had to carefully comb through the definitions to make sure there were no logic errors.
So I don't really disagree with your overall point (which is that the author can probably be trusted to say they are actually at 50%), but I think you oversell the assurances granted by formal verification when compared to software engineering.
... enough professional musicians use it as that I think I have to consider it that as well.
While not a bad proxy, I would say it is a sufficient but not necessary condition. Especially since many pros have the money to blow on overpriced gear (but perhaps you do too).
My own anecdote: as a kid I wanted to learn electric guitar and, of course being a kid, I shopped with my eyes. My dad bought me a $1.2k guitar. It's still a respectable guitar to this day, don't get me wrong. But if he had instead taken the old electric in the garage (bought for probably $500) and spent a hundred bucks on getting it set up, I would've had a guitar just as good. I know because I dug it out recently and I actually think it is quite nice.
An example to a more extreme degree: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klon_Centaur#Legacy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trigger_(guitar)
Not to defend Teenage Engineering, but I have seen a surprising number of OP-1s in music videos/live performances of bands I respect. Does that justify its price tag? I feel somewhat certain in saying "no," but I have no expertise. Love its aesthetics though.
I heard Woz give a talk (or Q&A?) at a conference and it was very enjoyable, even for someone who doesn't know much about Apple's history.
If we are to believe his word about not selling out, then I must assume that https://www.efforce.io/company also brings him more smiles than frowns. I suppose if you change the definition of "sell out" you can conventionally sell out without meeting your own definition. That said, I am reluctantly open to being shown evidence that the company isn't a grift.
The constant use of metaphor and simile drove me crazy. I had suspected this might be AI due to the frequency as well as absurdity of some of the comparisons (Talmudic scholars? Renaissance cardinals??) but humans also write dumb things like this that make them feel smart more than they serve rhetorical purpose. Or so I think.
I mean just look at this. I didn't even need to look through more than a few paragraphs to find:
But the subscription traps are where the real extraction occurs—and here we encounter the kind of business model innovation that would make a mobster tip his hat in professional admiration. Customers complain of being locked into year-long commitments they can't escape, like hotel California but with erectile dysfunction pills. Better Business Bureau complaints reveal the pattern with the reliability of a Swiss timepiece: ... Picture ordering a 3-month hair loss kit only to find Hims has shipped and charged for a fourth without consent, like a pharmaceutical version of that friend who keeps ordering shots when you've already said you're driving.
BTW, where's the referral URL you speak of? I didn't realize there was a smoking gun.
I have never said that.
Then I misunderstood your comment. I read it as "not invested in their tools => not a good programmer."
Reading the replies to my sibling comments, I don't think we really disagree but we probably have different pictures in our heads when reading the context of this thread.
That's kind of a weird point to make. I don't see why it would be a universal truth that a good programmer is someone who invests in their tools.
I could just as easily say that good programmers are the ones who don't have sophisticated tooling setups because it means that they spend more time programming.
I'm inclined to agree with other comments that the baseline for productivity is probably lower than we think. It's fine to enjoy the process of making a perfect setup, but I don't see it as a prerequisite or strong indicator for being a strong programmer.
I wouldn't be too surprised if PL proofs were simpler to start with. Part of what I hear people say is that they also are a lot more routine. Do structural induction, apply the IH to show an invariant holds, continue. I haven't done much theorem proving, nor have I done any "mathematical" (e.g. analysis) proofs with a theorem prover, but it makes me wonder how much skill transfer there is between them if "mathematical" proofs require a much different approach.
I will also mention Software Foundations in Rocq (perhaps there is a Lean port). I worked through some of the first parts of it and found it quite pleasant.
This went over my head at first, but I really like it. So for those like me: it converts network traffic into audio output.
YouTube explainer: https://youtu.be/vfgySTaM1TI
It's an admittedly smaller dataset, but Hook Theory has an analysis that allows you to search by chords (including relative) and look at trends:
https://www.hooktheory.com/theorytab
https://www.hooktheory.com/trends
It's a weird coincidence to see this post since I only occasionally remember about Hook Theory and binge it, but I remembered earlier this week.
Many of you have probably heard the Axis of Awesome four chords song (if not, look it up, it's great), but it's fun doing the same thing with other songs.
Like, did you know that you can sing the chorus of Numb by Linkin Park over the chorus of...
* I Hate Everything About You by Three Days Grace
* Immortals by Fallout Boy
* Cheap Thrills by Sia (swung Numb lol)
(+ the bridge of The Rock Show by Blink 182)
Numb has a pretty common chord progression so I could pick songs with the exact same chords, but there are also some oddly specific finds like this video game (?) song that inexplicably has the same relative chord progression as Hotel California https://www.hooktheory.com/theorytab/view/zun/reincarnation#...
---
I am often surprised how a seemingly simple chord progression has only one result, even when I search by relative chords and ignore extensions and inversions, e.g. https://www.hooktheory.com/theorytab/chord-search/results?ke...
However when you put that query into the normal search box, it does match a lot more songs, showing that there is a i III _ VII trend, just that i III vi VII is strange (which I guess makes sense). Perhaps my lack of music theory makes it harder to normalize my queries, but it's also possible that (1) there isn't enough data or (2) there is inconsistency in how people annotate the pieces (some songs will have II II II II, for example, following the rhythm, whereas some songs will have just a single II).
Yeah this is awesome.
For keyboards really similar to OP's
The keyboard they were inspired by (not for sale... yet?): https://old.reddit.com/r/ErgoMechKeyboards/comments/1cfg3vr/...
Corneish (out of stock): https://lowprokb.ca/products/corne-ish-zen?variant=376943319... Unicorne: https://new.boardsource.xyz/products/unicorne-LP
The corneish is an absolute gem in my opinion. It is possibly (probably?) open-sourced too.
Another happy doom user (and formerly unhappy vim configure-er).
Although the objection I see is more like "Why bother learning to use emacs/vim when VSCode is free and does everything I care about and my friends use it?" Which, to be fair, the emacs/vim learning curve isn't for everyone. I sometimes wish they had less "leet programmer" cred, though, since what is cred to the leet programmer is (in this case at least) stigma to the majority.
Your comparison hits home for me. I have been playing guitar on-and-off for over a decade (OK, maybe more like trying to play guitar) and I still really enjoy Guitar Hero.
It's instant gratification: I don't have as much fun practicing at .75x speed with a metronome to learn the hard part of a piece. Instead a video game tells me how great I am at "guitar" by being able to push buttons and strum on the beat, not to mention that I hear the sounds of my favorite songs come out when I do it.
For a similar reason, I like Rocksmith (guitar hero but with a real guitar), but the gratification is not quite so instant. They gamify the practicing part but I still need to do it, otherwise the part I'm playing actually sounds bad. And sight-reading is so much harder when there are more than 5 buttons.
I feel this is a little unfair to the parent as they are offering a solution for an unsupported platform.