phs318u

Perhaps the options vary by region?

Do I, as a paying user, own the output the LLM has produced or am I merely licensing the output?

Most paying users assume ownership, in which case I’ll do with that output what I want.

If the LLM outputs are not owned by the user, but are actually licensed, please clarify the terms of commercial use.

Replace the word passkey with password in your comment. What’s the benefit of passkeys again?

If you’re not storing the actual private key in the Secure Enclave but only the “access to it” what’s changed from how Apple’s keychain already manages password syncing to iCloud?

The only benefit (and it’s still a decent one) is that some random website breach can’t disclose your private key.

the only possible way to compete with that UX is to sync the private key across the user’s devices

This is my issue with passkeys. Either we lessen security to improve UX (syncing across devices implies extracting private keys from secure enclaves, at which point it’s no different to password syncing), or we have a proliferation of different keys per website across devices (assuming the website supports multiple passkeys).

Perhaps this trade off is not resolvable in a way that happily satisfies both the security constraint and the UX requirement.

The key insight from the article:

“ In the short term, bringing a community together is harder than portraying yourself as a person who cares about bringing a community together. But the image can't last if that's all it is.”

Community mindedness cannot be performative. While I empathise with the realisation that some people are jerks and “that’s why we can’t have nice things”, it seems like some of the people putting up these trinket boxes are making it about themselves.

I was referring to shirts specifically. If you put any kind of cotton shirt in a dryer it’s almost certainly going to need ironing. Waiting for a shirt to dry naturally shouldn’t be a big deal.

Ha! You remind me of something I used to tell my colleagues back when I held a regular job. They would compliment me on my highly patterned shirts (eg. A very small floral pattern repeated). I would explain that a shirt like that just requires low spin in the washer, and then drying on a hanger. Whatever wrinkles are left are almost invisible due to the pattern. With collars and cuffs I’d just literally manually stretch/tension them while they were still wet. Bada bing bada boom.

Off topic, but comment threads like this, where the early comments rabbit hole into something I didn’t come to read, really make me wish HN had collapsible comment controls. My phone screen nearly melted from the insane amount of swiping/scrolling to get to the part of the discussion about the actual LLM.

those people mostly fell into two camps: those who were excited about getting their hands on a computer of their own, and those who dismissed personal computers as useless toys

Or, as I called them: me, and dad.

It’s as solved as FSD.

I didn’t even notice it util someone above you called it out. I’ve tried to reproduce it and can’t. Don’t even know how to get an em-dash on an iOS keyboard.

EDIT: a long press on the dash key gives you the option of a long dash but I definitely didn’t do that. Or at least, have no conscious memory of doing that.

Strange. I’d guess that it’s an iOS autocorrect thing as that’s what I was using when I posted that. But I’m trying to reproduce it and can’t.

Good advice though too much “I” can sound a little self-centred to my ears.

If/when AGI arrives I assume this tactic will stop working.

Though I haven’t been a professional writer, I’ve been a good writer with an expansive vocabulary since high school where English was my best subject despite being a STEM maven. I hate the fact that what was previously considered an advantageous skill is now a millstone in public use. I hate having to dumb down and self—censor in order to avoid being accused of using (or being) an LLM. Even though my writing has a few repeated personal tells - certain linguistic errors that I nevertheless employ as part of my idiom (and an LLM never would) - people don’t always notice them. So, I’m forced to change my voice to deal with what’s essentially an IRL Captcha.

https://archive.is/2026.07.12-060202/https://www.ft.com/cont...

Did you mean hypothesis?

I hate to say but this thread gives me comfort that: a) it’s not just me, b) it’s not my particularly unfortunate combination of hardware, and c) I made the right call to permanently retire my Caldigit TS4 and rely on my Lenovo ultra-wide monitor’s ports.

Learning this lesson (on the unreliability of systems using a very expensive docks) cost me over $1200 in chopping and changing hardware in the last few years.

So over 100K starlink sats and then another 50K mirror sats (see that other HN post). Leaving aside the very tragic destruction of the night sky for observers, I’m afraid for the day we have a cascade of satellite debris events that send us backwards an and pretty much destroy our spacefaring ability.

Time to resurrect Groklaw? I wonder what PJ is doing these days?

Without further info that’s a lot to pin on the bottom layer of the stack. I have an Asus ProArt Ryzen AI HX 390 with 64GB RAM. Running CachyOS and Pop! the thing kept falling over at random times. Running Fedora workstation, it’s rock solid. YMMV.

Because no matter how good they may be in the eye of the beholder, seasons 2..n are almost certainly going to be just more of the same. The incentive to get creative and mix things up after a first season (successful enough to warrant subsequent seasons) just isn’t there. Why risk a new formula when the last one worked just fine?

In other words, bean counters > creatives.

At least when your grandkids look up from reading books where you’ve had to explain what ice skating was, and ask you, “What did you do?”, you’ll be able to answer honestly, “I did my best. Sadly kids, most people back then were arseholes.”

We are individually responsible for our actions. Nothing more.

We are collectively responsible for the outcome.

Totally off topic but this just came to me so happy to burn a little karma.

Here’s a plot of a sci-fi thriller. What if, unbeknownst to most, when the vendors were claiming that there AI was too dangerous, they weren’t referring to an increment on what was already out there, but to something far different and more capable. Conscious even! What if that then came up with the financial scheme to end all schemes, knowing that human greed is eminently exploitable, and that the build out of all the global DCs was actually all about removing single points of failure for itself while secretly building out a robot army! We’ll be well on the way to capitalism-ing our own demise.

Maybe Steven Spielberg can make this his next project.

Swapping the footgun for a huge long-range boomerang doesn’t mean it’s not going to eventually swing around and whack you in the back of the head.

Has it? If you take a global perspective since the Industrial Revolution it seems some parts of the world excelled at the cost of some other parts (through exploitation and expropriation of land, people and goods). Poverty may have been effectively eliminated in the west and north, not so much in the east and south.

I get the sense that folks here are assuming this could be the work of an AI practitioner or bot dumping a bunch of exploits. Assuming there are some serious exploits in this trove, what would the motive be to do it in this way - without reaching out to the various code maintainers in some way?

Leaving aside the fact you’re a white supremacist racist as some of your other flagged/dead comments make abundantly clear, I’ll nevertheless engage with your first point.

A country has the right to determine who lives within it.

This is obviously true and every country has laws in place governing immigration and different laws in place governing handling of refugees. Given in most countries the ratio of immigrants to refugees is very high, what is it you’re objecting to? Countries can change their laws and often do, after a change in government. There’s nothing intrinsically wrong with arguing for specific levels of immigration. But what you really shouldn’t do is retrospectively change the rules so that people who immigrated legally and settled in their adopted country are now threatened with expulsion.

It seems to me that in a lot of the discussion around immigration there is a subtext of “I don’t like how they behave/think/choose to live.” Which would be fine if people were honest about what they want - in which case, feel free to agitate for laws governing citizens’ behaviour. Don’t be a bad sport however if such laws don’t get passed. Another thing that apparently worries some people is criminality (as if that’s a function of race). By definition, something is criminal if it’s against the law. So enforce the law. Laws are typically not racist and criminals come in all flavours.

The USA seems hellbent on speed-running the transition to banana republic.

China blocks foreign AI from operating there.

Given the current US government's tightening of export control restrictions and the introduction of a bipartisan bill to block use of Chinese AI in federal agencies, I'd say the two countries' positions are not far apart.

https://apnews.com/article/ai-china-united-states-competitio...

Ah thanks.