Midwest.
HN user
dcow
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/dcow; my proof: https://keybase.io/dcow/sigs/xBvSnLxOjHpAg2_04WWlwJRwH_8oeZrTq3XPlmwZNOg ]
So did it pass the exam, or not?
Why does the page only show up to 008? Did TS remove the notice?
Edit: my bad, it's between 008 and 007 ?=
Yes, it was a step in the right direction at the time. But there are plenty of well-documented warts with the approach which Fuchsia aimed to solve via capabilities (and which the Linux community general solved via crun).
Why should it be? We have containers and capabilities…
Even though it’s completely normal to us and in widespread use, GP is a reminder that conceptually it’s a broken model. Security should be capability-based not user-based. And to anyone who didn’t grow up on a desktop this model makes complete sense since it’s what your phone uses.
So React is like C++?
My only thought is that "good" genai authors/articles will easily get through the filter while "generic" ones will fail. So the outcome won't be all genai articles getting flagged (unless people self-report), just the low quality ones. I'm guessing that's okay and I'm one of those people who discounts genai writing the second I read one of the tells, so the flag would save me time.
Ultimately though this is the same debate as "should we allow genai code in codebases". High quality code lands naturally while slop is slop. Not much value in banning AI outright--the desire is predominantly to ban the slop.
Maybe the tag should be [slop] rather than [genai]...
It’s not a problem to fail students. But when the online wing of the school has a 35% graduation rate, doesn’t hold lectures, and has a swarm of disgruntled reviews from people who feel like the school is in the business of taking Pell grants and maxing their student loans then stonewalling them when they hit mid 3rd year (right after you’re in for a pound) and start asking questions about where all the money went and why they were sitting at a B all semester then magically ended up with a 59 after the final, it’s a little sus.
I always thought these TLDs were a flight risk to be used in any serious capacity. What if the random state decides you/your business are in violation of [whatever] and kick you off?
It’s getting so bad. My wife is in a remote school where they fail students occasionally to squeeze a little extra $$ out of them.
You just described my teacher, and I’m fairly certain we didn’t go to the same middle school.
If the UI was novel enough then there would be a software patent for it in this case. Anyway I’m not sure what your point is? Copyright is a dated concept and AI only reinforces that. Do you really believe the first one to prompt an AI in a specific way should be allowed to enforce exclusive ownership of the output? That’s insane.
When everyone is using LLMs to suggest IA, build basic UIs, dump out your startup in a day, etc. everything will look the same, even the source code. There will be no way to litigate this. Does it benefit society to force two companies to make their products look different? Where’s the outrage over all basic pencils looking the same? Let the market decide which pencils it prefers.
You said:
The IPv6 feature isn’t link-local addresses, it’s being able to specify the interface to bind to as part of the address specification. This lets you demand that your IPv6-based tool use your wired Ethernet connection, for example.
I don’t think a design goal of IPv6 was to enable users to demand which link the kernel uses or open up some rich new world of link local ip services. I think it’s more like “because IPv6 hosts assign everything an address all at once, there’s a new problem when two interfaces use the same link local addresses since we can’t guarantee uniqueness so we have to invent this stupid zone_id convention to work around poor protocol design and implementation”. Design goals are different than constraints.
Have hosts put a guid in its LL address and print that on the sticker next to the mac address… idk. Actually it’d be nice if we only did link-exclusive things at the link layer, eh?
When I say “zones” I’m referring to site-local addresses specifically which were deprecated and replaced by ULAs because zones in anything other than link local addresses were declared stupid and hard to implement. That may be where the confusion is coming from. I’m sorry I didn’t use specific language. I understand what we commonly call the “interface scope” is technically a “zone id”.
mDNS working on link-local means you can advertise your service over mDNS so no user ever types this shit into their address bar in the first place.
I still maintain that the interface leaking into the address is a bad thing from a design perspective even though I very much appreciate that everything works naturally on v6 LL addresses after applying this one small fix… no user should ever by typing a v6 LL into a browser, and probably every use case you can imagine that isn’t managing network link topology or NDP/bootstrap or running LL name resolution can be solved with ULAs or DNS.
That is not a design goal of IPv6. It’s a terrible leak in the abstraction.
Hasn’t everyone moved on to ULAs now?
To explain, IPv6 link local addresses are like using a MAC address to send packets. You wouldn’t ever host services on a LL address and things that do are doing it wrong. Every v6 router should advertise a ULA prefix to all downstream clients. If you want to connect to your router’s web UI you’d use its universal local address—not its link local—and avoid all of these problems. This is exactly why zones were deemed mistake and replaced by ULAs and this was 10 years ago… at least!
Right. Nobody cares whether Musk won or lost (well maybe a few do). People actually following the case wanted to know whether OpenAI would be held in any way accountable for anything. And this “resolution” does not satisfy. Before Musk got involved, what happened at OpenAI was a BigProblem for many people.
I am absolutely certain that if Sam was suing xAI and the case got dismissed on a technicality people would be lined up with screeds about the injustice of the situation.
I did this too, but it happened almost 10 years ago when Google started locking down Android in the name of battery life. I saw the writing on the walls and said if Android is going to be just like iOS because we collectively can’t have nice things, then at least I’ll live out that sad reality on better hardware.
By this definition bbs+ signatures are ZK.
And to prevent companies from targeting children inappropriately.
Your kids can’t buy alcohol though. If you want to unlock your phone and let your kids read smut then more power to you. Age gates do not and never will stop that. But I sure as hell don’t want companies selling porn to 5 yr olds.
What is your definition of zero knowledge?
This sub thread really doesn’t add value to the discussion IMO and isn’t a fit for HN. The only likely outcome is a real human is attacked based on pure speculation. Let the mods decide if a user is breaking any policy regarding AI comment submissions. Litigating it here is cringe.
How is this different from any other code you publish?
Some jobs require investment in the future. Some do not. That’s just reality. Not white how I feel about it personally, but I think there is a fair amount of the developer trade that is operational.
Interesting I’d never picked up on this pedantic subtlety. I too thought reified meant what you could do at the call site not what you could do at runtime. Was my understanding wrong, or is Gemini hallucinating.
In any event, you have to use weird (I think “unsafe”) reflection tricks to get the type info back at runtime in Java. To the point where it makes you think it’s not supported by the language design but rather a clever accident that someone figured out how to abuse.