HN user

nirui

2,039 karma

You know, I figured if I run this undefined behavior long enough, eventually one day that server will just jump down the shelf and fix the red black tree by itself.

[ my public key: https://keybase.io/nirui; my proof: https://keybase.io/nirui/sigs/oi8UKCZcYxKij-Pi43fDt35S1cHWmEKrFeMHZ4wW5Mo ]

Posts1
Comments625
View on HN

That's why it matters for people to hold the control of the tech, not companies, as I've already mentioned quite clearly.

LLM is here to stay, keep denying the fact won't work. What does is to make the tech so abundant, it flushes the bad actors, such as for-profit AIs, completely out. It's either this, or get crushed by for-profit AIs, pick one.

All the emotion of speculations aside, how it runs? It boots faster yeah, but what about RAM and CPU usage? Weird dead loop or dead locks?

If it run as good as before or even better, then that's kinda impressive.

I'm a developer so I really don't like it when AI might took my job, but if everyone on this planet could create a software for themselves exactly as how they wanted with just a few simple demands, that will change the world for the better.

Think of it as a democratization of technology. You don't want Microsoft stealing your data? Just ask a AI to write an OS for you. You don't want Google to listen to what you're saying? Just ask a AI to design a phone for you. If one day the AI ended up doing that, it will be the ultimate technology self-sufficient. In front of that, your job security is insignificant.

It is also why keeping the tech open source is that much important. Otherwise, it's still the same old shit again and again, and, you lose your job too.

The USB-C idea is great, but the port design is not. If you search with the keyword "USB-C" and "tugged", you'll find a lot of horror stories ranging from bent socket/connectors to fried systems.

A few samples:

    - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11021665 (read comments)
    - https://www.quora.com/Is-it-just-me-or-are-USB-C-ports-not-actually-very-durable-or-stable
    - https://www.reddit.com/r/PSVR/comments/11mdfn8/so_this_happened_accidentally_tugged_cable_ps5/
    - https://www.reddit.com/r/daddit/comments/1s1kk4i/pro_dad_tip_if_your_kids_have_lights_or_toys_that/
I really like the idea of single port all capable, but the current design of USB-C port is just not up for the task. At least you need a port design that is fail-safe, not fail-dead, to do this job.

I mean, even the victims themselves came out and explicitly emphasized that scanning chat messages does not help.

I'm feeling these politicians was not doing it for the victims. Instead, it's almost like the victims are providing reasons to allow the politicians to expand their own power.

The Accelerationism (see note below) part of me think it's a good thing, because a heavily regulated country is often also a backward country. Doing things like this long enough, then you get out competed by everyone else, your population shrinks to zero and your land gets reused.

(Note: The word "Accelerationism" in the Chinese dissidents circle means that, if a bad future is certain and it trends to destroy itself eventually, we might as well just let it happen faster, so the pain maybe shorter. More: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerator-in-Chief)

Look, EU obviously have a few good regulations. But a regulation must be correctly designed and implemented, and it must not punish good people. Scanning private messages is a punishment to all.

If EU must scan something, I'd say scanning all messages/phone calls sent out by the politicians might do more good, consider how much trust people put on them (maybe they shouldn't).

No, I mean just let them host the instance themselves, and they can decide to do whatever.

Many of these publishers already got a podcast/video publishing routine anyways and they just put ads directly in the podcast/video. I guess maybe it's not that hard for them to add another publishing channel.

Getting one of the proper news agencies on board is very beneficial for the PeerTube network, because currently there's not much good quality content on it. News videos maybe a good baseline to keep user engaged (as long as they're not too political).

If PeerTube is my software, I'll probably pay my own money to get the agencies on board. I'll even host their site myself if it needs to (at least for the first few years, to demonstrate the value of the software).

Hasn't cared about PeerTube for a long time, but this software is getting really impressive. Maybe it's time to move towards the next step: getting publishers on board.

I could totally see myself hooked if I can watch news on it. Can someone from a proper news agency, such as BBC, DW, Reuters, NYT etc test the software and maybe make a pitch? If these agencies are hosting their own PeerTube instances, that would be a major win.

You can put the biggest warning on the phone, make it as annoying as possible. Then, the user sees the warning, as well as the fact that all the other people are ignoring the warning, click "Accept" 10 times and got surprised when someone comes to collect the testicle they just donated by themselves.

That's the same reason why desktop computer has so many malwares, that's why phones now has permission systems to restrict what an app can do on it.

If you want to create a system for everyone, including your 60 years old mom and her mom, you need similar of not better permission systems. Linux currently don't have that, and DON'T except an old fashion car mechanic will delicately configure AppArmor etc with his oily fingers in the middle of fixing a client's car.

Emotional talk aside, there's not many good solution to this problem, unless of course F-Droid starts to make their own phones.

But then, Librem 5 Phone was just failed few years ago, telling the story that people who care about their rights are still sensitive to how much they would pay (which is a form of rights too).

Also but, there is the thing, making a phone is not easy. If you reach deep enough, you'll eventually reach the layer where you realize how solid the monopolization has become. The global telecom standards if you read them is in the hands of few companies, Boardcom, Motorola, Huawei, Nokia and such. They'll control whether or not your phone can access the network. Then there's telecom companies who runs the network, and they might have to approve your device/modem as well since they got their channel allocation from the government.

It's not easy, and it's not just the software problem.

Oh and yes, we also have the software problem. Linux, if you want to go that route, cannot be used as a mobile OS, as least not for the public, because the average people don't know how to properly secure their system, and Linux is not a restrictive-by-default system. It will be a malware nightmare if you ship Linux on a phone as is.

The best hope for now I think is for geek vendors to make more mobile/4/5G enabled Fairphone or uConsole-like product to the enthusiast market, and then you can load whatever OS on it as you want.

These HTTP servers will typically be private, inaccessible to other devices on the network. Instead, you’ll use them over SSH, or locally.

So, if I read it correctly, SSH is there to provide connectivity and security, and the core app idea is based on HTTP and web?

On the HTTP side, there are already some "app managers" such as Dokku and Coolify, and you can already `ssh ...-L...` map their ports to your local. But I guess the browser you build will do that (or something similar) automatically to make it more convenient for the user, so that's nice.

Not sure about the Outerframe idea tho. Right now you can already build things with webasm and have it send commands to draw stuff on to a canvas to create very rich custom UI elements, that is in addition to the standard HTML UI elements provided by the browser. Why another standard?

...instead of injecting $2 trillion and counting into a few AI companies...

Similar to the "why we spend money exploring space when there are hungry people on Earth?" question, I don't think this is a This Or That argument.

People and companies have different interests, some don't/can't care about education etc so they don't invest in those fields. Forcing these people/companies to invest in areas they don't interested in usually results in bad outcomes that is way worse than just let them be.

But some, do invest in education or civil infrastructure projects. It's not as hot, because... well, usually it makes less money from those things.

The core problem is still that, it is hard to figure out how to invest in such way that it could help the disadvantaged people, while at the same time maintaining a 10 or even 100x growth in the next 5 years.

From the company's perspective, there's no dilemma here, it's 100x growth potential ahead of everything else.

    > "hey, boss, can we install action X?"
    > "Hey, boss, I am going to install action X."
They are literally the same thing to me.

The tone change don't really effect my decision path, both triggers "reviewing of the XYZ problem", a.k.a "why?". People who don't do that either trusts you a lot, or never worked professionally before and maybe about to learn a lesson from it.

Facebook is not just a "evolution of this concept". I would argue they, along with Twitter (currently know as X) and other similar service is completely different from blogs.

The main different is the designs Facebook has employed manipulated their users to adopt this "scroll down" method of reading. Each item of information is only displayed just a few seconds on user's screen, unless user stopped scrolling at the item they really interested in (and then maybe tap to open it).

That's not the same design used by blogs. Think of blogs as mini news sites, it encourages their readers to open the content in a full page to read it without interruptions. And, the readers has to calm their heats down to read long statements, this costs time and demands focus.

If you port the design used by blogs and apply it to display Facebook posts, that will be user-hostile, because user has to click each post only to read a potentially very short content.

The opposite is true too. You can't encourage user to "scroll down" a wall of long texts just to read the next wall of long texts, because that will be exhausting. You can't even create the anticipation that there's more stuff down, because that will just manipulates the user to keep scrolling down and skip.

That's why I think even you technically can aggregate blogs and social media in one app, you should probably be careful about it.

Midjourney Medical 1 month ago

Well... they certainly did not show that in the video.

Oh and yeah, there are more difficult problem. For example, if the platform moves to lower/lift people in or out the water, some people will probably fail to remain still or even start panic. This might effect the final image.

Not sure if Midjourney has way to counter that. Great if they do.

Midjourney Medical 1 month ago

I watched the video first without reading the text and thought, wow, Midjourney has gotten really good, they generated debris in the water exactly like what would happen in real life if the water is reused enough.

Then I started reading the text, and realize it's not an ad for their video generating tool? Cool if each of it can do ~120000 scans per-month. But if I have to step in to a tank filled with debris and discharges from ~3,999 other people (assuming the machine is maintained daily), I think I might have to wear protection and you must not lower me beyond my mouth.

But, if the claim is real, then yea, it could really help. So many health problems can be discovered early with ultrasound scan, only if it can be made easy, cheap and fast. Not sure about resolution and other specs, if it can be as good as CT, then more lives can be saved.

Qwen is still controlled by Alibaba, one company. We can't let the future be in the hands of a few companies, can we?

Fun fact: Qwen was not initially a Apache Licensed project, it was based on a custom license from Alibaba that restricts commercial use: https://github.com/QwenLM/Qwen/blob/ba2d85a13b28ed1ee0dde2d6.... There's no guarantee that they won't just switch it back later.

Kudos for them for switching to Apache License, of course. BUT, they're still a for-profit company. So as DeepSeek btw.

we have no reason to believe their statements about risks are insincere

Why? Because they said it a few times? Then if they know the risk, why do they still making it? Comes out the "some one will do it eventually, better be us 'good' people to do it first" talking point?

See? It is a marketing strategy after all. These all talks, it's all to fit themselves into the "'good' people" narrative. It's a centuries old strategy to shield it's user from responsibilities while luring the support from the stupid.

However, the most harmful damage, which is mass layoffs, is already partially done. This could really kill, a massive genocide even, by making people jobless and potentially incomeless. And it is shown that these tech CEOs, they don't care any bit of that beyond the point "I've already told you so".

If you have undefined behavior in your code your bug might become a heisenbug

OR, the OS might kick in and throw a segmentation fault etc, often with some information associated to it.

Again, if a LLM can output 100% correct code, no bug of whatever kind should exist. Seeing a segfault could just invalidate that assumption completely and definitively. That's the point.

Rust guarantees lack of undefined behavior in safe code

And that don't guarantee heisenbug-free, that just means your heisenbug was fully checked by Rust compiler and is now managed by the language runtime/facilities.

So, now instead of a crashed program and a "sever" DoS vulnerably, you got a disconnected user every time they trigger the bug. The user might assume it's the network, so does your logging stack. After a few times, the user starts bitching about your stupid network, and left for your competitor's product, while you busily trying to figure out why the network suddenly ain't as good as it used to.

70%[1][2] is tiny?

It really depends on how they define what counts as "vulnerably", or in Chrome's case, "'high severity' security bugs" which is very specific. Microsoft probably have many decades-old code written before the invention of better checkers, that contributed to the problem.

Speaks volumes to the strengths of the language

Memory safety is just a tiny part of over all security. If a LLM can transcode correctly, then it should also output 100% correct C code.

On the other hand, If a LLM cannot correctly transcode, then using Rust may just make the bug soundless, because the language runtime/code-gen "avoided" usual punishments that might make the bug (and bug report) obvious.

Pity. I recently started a fun activity to rebrush my math my where I tries to solve problems while asking Gemini Live mode for confirmation and suggestions, sometimes step by step.

It kinda was fun, like a very patient professor stand right besides you. It was the one of the best math learning experience I've ever had, and you don't even need to send bribe/gift to Gemini to keep you in it's favor.

On the other hand, if you ask a LLM to completely finish the work without thinking it through by yourself, then it sounded like cheating, to yourself.

and then abscond to China

I'm a Chinese, from what I learned, you probably don't see the situation clearly.

The problem is influence. America wants to solve the Cuba (and Iran) problem since very long ago, and right now, while China is busy patching up their economic slop/mismanagement and Russia is trapped in Ukraine, is simply the best time to do so.

With Cuba is cleared out, the Americas continent will be cleared of major (and loud) threats against America. That alone is beneficial.

It's the same but opposite reason why America is supporting Japan, Taiwan and Europe etc, to control the influence of their competitors like China, Russia, India, Brazil etc (a.k.a Global South). It also allow Americans to keep a tap on Japan, Taiwan and Europe (etc) so they remains in American control.

That's probably the 4-D chess you talked about.

Also, the "Trump the 'Nation Builder'" part: In China, "Nation Builder" was a popular forename, it means "someone who contributes to their own country/nation". In the Trump context, it means that Trump's policies is benefiting China's goal. That is, when compare to Biden's policy which is much sophisticated and on point (while Trump's is blunt and wasteful).

But I don't think American's soft gesture towards China will last after Cuba and Iran is dealt with (if) in a American victory though. Unlike what the "New World Order" conspiracy suggests, I don't think this world is stupid enough to not to pursue the maximums goal when possible. That's probably why Americans are working towards the maximums goal inches by inches.

Weaponizing Bureaucracy

Don't over interpret this. You can also weaponize efficiency too, just like what USSR did to itself, hyper optimizing their industrial sector and leaving everything else to a free dry.

Truth is, keep something alive is just hard. It dies if you overdo, and it also dies if you underdo. A sabotage could just tip the balance, that's all.

Sometimes hiding internals is reasonable, but it could cause inconvenient. Exposing everything could make it harder to do interface management etc.

It's really a system design problem rather than access control: if you separate functional modules in a reasonable way, then it can be better reused.

It confuses easiness with simplicity

A lot of libs/packages in Go's stdlib also has this problem. They like to package everything in a very tight interface (very obvious example includes crypto/* and http), without exposing implementation detail to the end user.

Doing this of course has it's benefits, but if the feature provided by the stdlib slightly don't fit you needs, then you might have to write your own (potentially unsafe and/or less performant) one from zero.

Rust is great overall, but there's some oddities. For example their lib.rs / `mod` is very, very unintuitive, it felt overdesigned and unnecessarily complex (just see [their book]). I like what Go or Java did to their lib/package systems, it's much better that way.

[their book]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/book/ch07-05-separating-mod...

PHP's Oddities 2 months ago

If I remember it correctly, the "Java-lite" part comes rather late. PHP was more close to Perl and/or other old-days scripting language, it allows you to quickly launch a web page. Just

    <p><?php echo(htmlspecialchars($_GET['user'])); ?></p>
and you get a hello page with a parameter specifiable via `?user=` query.

But then people started to actually use it to build big sites, `echo($_GET['user'])` alone is not enough, it has to be:

    <?php
    $user = "guest";
    if (!empty($_GET['user'])) { // Have to remember to do this check everytime when handling $_GET/$_POST etc
        ... safety check etc etc
        $user = htmlspecialchars($_GET['user'], ...more parameters...);
    }
    ...
So people started to add module/components as well as ways to load and use those components, to enable them to write code like:
   <?php

   use My\Beautiful\InputFilter;
   use My\Beautiful\InputFilters\Integer;

   function get_page_num_from_query(InputFilter $f, array $source, string $name): bool {
     return $f->is_valid(new Integer(0, 100), $source, $name);
   } // Or something like that, hasn't write a single line since PHP5.
That's when it got it's Java look.

We can stop reading LLM-generated code just like we don’t read assembly, or bytecode, or transpiled JavaScript; our high-level language source would now be another form of machine code.

My opinion is very close to this. Currently the reason that it's bad to not reviewing/testing the code LLMs generated is because the LLMs can sometime generate bad codes. But it's a bug that can be improved. One day you'll have LLMs generating code consistently better than what a human could write. And then you just stop needing to review them. (And that's probably also the time where most programmers/developers got fired too)

Don't get surprised if anyday the LLMs starts to generate binaries directly. THAT will be impossible to read and costs more time to analyze.

The "benefits all of humanity" narrative was interesting.

If Elon Musk remained the silly/goofy outsider character he was, then the narrative that he naively invested in OpenAI for the good of all mankind is somewhat believable.

However, he really turned himself a serious shitball in the past few years and did some really harmful things intentionally. Maybe his trying to test the boundaries or something? But it does made his "kindness" somewhat hard to believe.

Also, I can't see any outcome where the general labor (which most of us are) can benefit from AI development, given the context that the world is suffering from population decline and economic crisis, which could reduce overall opportunity and at the same time make living harder.

After all, AI is different than other tech in that, the end gold for AI is to eliminate all "frictions".

What is frictions? Well, say if you want to go to a place, the getting up and leave, the driving, the parking, the walking, that's all friction. In a frictionless world, you want to go to a place, and you already there, it's done right as you finishes your wishing.

Here's the thing: as general labors, most services we provide is also to reduce friction, we exchange that for money to survive. That's how we got a share of the wealth of the world. So if there's less friction, then will translate to less opportunity, in that scene, "we all lost" too.

BTW: in my (Chinese) education, we were told that when productivity is advanced enough, communism will become the final and only choice of humanity. The silly communists never realized that if productivity is really that advanced, then there's a chance that the life of most people could become some redundant waste to be eliminated.

It is hard to replace the old thing with another old thing. Search engine is already a fine tuned business, new comers will have hard time in it, no matter their tech stack.

It's like trying to raise better horses, while the other side has already built a empire on that and weaponized it.

The way out of here is to find something better than search engine, just like how cars replaced horses. But it's the same reason Google Search is replacing itself with AI too, they're already trying to replace their horses with cars.