HN user

haneul

87 karma
Posts0
Comments68
View on HN
No posts found.

I still use it.

We have it as a data analyst that’s been trained via exemplar queries and MD about the underlying databases.

It also does ad creatives analysis and overall paid marketing spend analysis, including delivering briefs and conversing with stakeholders about things such as cross-ad-platform deduplicated cost of customer acquisition.

In general it is used to lower the technical bar required for cross-domain collab.

Even in a product as technically wonderful as Temporal, we can have relatively simple oversights like this that lead to cross tenant leakage.

If anyone is more familiar with Temporal, is there a way clients could have had internal defense in depth that guards against tenant leakage at the provider (Temporal) level?

GPT-5.3-Codex 6 months ago

My codex CLI didn’t notice version bump available, but I manually did pnpm add -g @openai/codex and 5.3 was there after.

As someone who doesn't keep track of the influencer scene at the moment because I am way addicted to building...

You should totally give Claude Code a try. The biggest problem is that it is glaze-optimized, so have to work at getting it to not treat you like the biggest genius of all time. But when you manage to get in a good flow with it, and your project is very predictably searchable, results start to be quite helpful, even if just to unstuck yourself when you're in a rut.

Hah that's pretty fun. I got tossed about by the animated hands for a few, but grabbed a 194 after that.

Dunno about the trigrams though, mostly it's on the "token group" level for me - either the upcoming lookahead feels familiar or it doesn't, and I don't much get bothered by the specific letters as much as "oh I don't have muscle memory on that word, and it's sadly nestled between two easy words, so it's going to be a patchy bit of alternating speed".

Hmm you can tweak fine these days without messing up context. But, I run in “ask mode” only, with opus in claude code and o3 max in cursor. I specifically avoid agent mode because, like in the post, I feel like I gain less over time.

I infrequently tab complete. I type out 80-90% of what is suggested, with some modifications. It does help I can maintain 170 wpm indefinitely on the low-medium end.

Keeping up with the output isn’t much an issue at the moment given the limited typing speed of opus and o3 max. Having gained more familiarity with the workflow, the reading feels easier. Felt too fast at first for sure.

My hot take is that if GitHub copilot is your window into llms, you’re getting the motel experience.

Naw there are tricks you can use to pipeline these things so that apparent latency is under 500ms even with significant game state history awareness, and also to interrupt ongoing but freshly out of date commentary.

I couldn’t get it under 250ms though (for rocket league), but the tech should be better now than 2024.

Any reading on the topic you could point me to? Whenever I head about vestigial DNA, I’m reminded of the preserved wetlands which forced the roads to arc the long way around it. And in so doing, structurally affected traffic despite no cars ever going inside its bounds.

I guess what I’m wondering how we can be sure that structure is function but non-coding structure has no function and exerts no selective pressure - isn’t the Golgi apparatus analogously “non-coding”?

So GitHub might just choose to ignore the notice for React, get sued, and win, all without losing the safe harbor.

It wouldn't be React getting the notice. It would be say, someone forking React, then adding a pull request with some clearly DMCA-violating material.

Then, if downstream B DMCA shutdown doesn't affect upstream A's availability, there's still the question of A normally still having access to B's non-merged commits even in the case of B's deletion. So, A should still be access the DMCA-violating material.

And, if A's access to B's non-merged, DMCA-violating commit is truly revoked without affecting A otherwise... why can't we have a "Strong Delete" button on GitHub? Would seem they'd have to have "Strong Delete" functionality to comply with downstream B hitting DMCA.

Basically, I'm feeling either a violation of principle of least astonishment, or a violation of "strong-DMCA".

Unless this is to support a feature in Git/GitHub that I am too noob to understand. :shrug: