rollulus

I realized that in the age of LLMs I appreciate Julia’s writing even more. Authentic exploration as an antidote to overconfident know-it-all generated junk articles.

What’s much and what isn’t depends on the context. One hair on your head isn’t much but one hair in your soup is.

“We decide on something, leave it lying around, and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back.”

And

“If it's a Yes, we will say 'on we go', and if it's a No we will say 'we continue'.”

- Jean-Claude Juncker

What I missed in the article: the curves of the three “cone kinds” overlap. What if you could stimulate kinds of cones individually to see entirely new colors? Some people shoot layers at them into eyes. But you can also try this website: https://dynomight.net/colors/ (previously on HN but search fails me).

Interesting that this got posted now: the project is receiving increasingly more skepticism lately in the Dutch tech scene [0], and I think that’s fully justified.

[0] https://www.quotenet.nl/zakelijk/a71588202/techondernemers-m...

I’m in the very same situation currently. A coworker vibe coded a PR for me to review. I asked: normally I would ask “why did you do xyz”, but what are you going to do now, proxy that question to your LLM? And is the LLM going to construct a “why” based on the nonsensical code it produced? Is this how we want to work?

The review is currently stalled in absence of answers.

Mullvad is Swedish, right?

This article is incomplete without examples.

Incredible what mobile phones and browsers can do nowadays. I remember implementing this paper from 1993 (the absolutely OG for this topic and very readable): “Display of The Earth Taking into Account Atmospheric Scattering” by Nishita et al: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2933032_Display_of_...

Rewriting it using an LLM is one. But did all the contributors became as proficient in Rust as they were in Zig over night as well?

That’s because of the primary energy fallacy: https://medium.com/@jan.rosenow/have-we-been-duped-by-the-pr...

TL;DR: the efficiency of converting fossil energy resources into something useful is poor.

Do they maintain the original connection between the fibers or is that not worth the effort and is a swap not a problem?

Wouldn’t using opaque tokens have avoided the problem altogether?

They do other unholy things. I don’t know what, but consistently while playing music on my HomePod opening that site makes it stutter within a few minutes, fully stop working shortly afterwards and it needs a reboot to work again.

TL;DR: medical case report of a guy who inhaled hydrogen gas, lit a cigarette, blew up internally and survived.

I think there are two angles to look at this. Yes, there’s the attack on the weblog. But there’s also pressure on archive.today, e.g. an FBI investigation [1] and some entity using fictitious CSAM allegations [2].

[1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/11/fbi-subpoena-tri...

[2] https://adguard-dns.io/en/blog/archive-today-adguard-dns-blo...

You repeat the same mistake here:

I'm simply talking about the simple improbability of, out of all possible lives I could have had, mine being one this relatively comfortable and novel.

That implies that there is a separate organism and an “I” (I used the word soul for that) and that the two were assigned to each other. No, the two are the same. And the probability of you being you is 100%.

Your thinking is flawed. It seems to assume that you were pulled from a pool of souls and got assigned to an organism somewhere in time. That’s not the case. What makes you “you” is nothing but your brain cells.

I think “simulate” would’ve been a more accurate word than “build”.

Nice, thanks and I agree.

Well that depends on your luck, it could be a valid one about 1/16th of the time.

Anyone knows why this is called “decryption”? I thought that the mechanism was simply a fuse that would deny reading/debugging operations, is there actual crypto involved?

This article (with high slop vibes) and another article on their site (linked in the comments) seem to suggest that post quantum encryption mitigated the Sybil attack, without explanation. I fail to understand how the two are even related.

Cool theory but that should result in other attacks that peak in February too, can you give examples?

[citation needed]

So do I read it correctly that good old detective work did the job, and that breaking e2e encryption and client side scanning wasn’t needed? Politicians tell me a different story.

I thought that your “background in literature” contributed to the “well-written docs”, but that was LLMs!

Anecdotal, and even meta-anecdotal, but hey: four months ago I started to supplement omega 3 thanks to this hyperbolic HN comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45169875

Unlike the commenter, I didn’t suddenly turn into a chess grandmaster, but I did notice that my winter blues didn’t show up this year, the first time in a decade!

Not weird, that’s tradition by now.

Oh wow, great find! That’s really early days.