HN user
Anthropic optimized for "clean UI" metrics and forgot developers care more about not having their codebase silently corrupted. Every AI company relearns the same lesson: autonomy is the enemy of trust.
Moving the project to a foundation is smart. Most AI tools die when the founder leaves. This one might actually survive.
Reverting a few trivial commits because of purity tests is a bad precedent. It rewards the loudest commenters and punishes maintainers.
Looks polished. For me the switching cost is real since Screen Studio already works. If you can win on editing speed, captions, and clean exports that stay portable, there is definitely room for a new tool.
Humans did the actual work: framing the problem, computing base cases, verifying results. GPT just refactored a formula. That's a compiler's job, not a physicist's. Stop letting marketing write science headlines.
Every release they claim it writes production code but my team still spends hours fixing subtle bugs the model introduces. The demos are cherry picked and the real world failure rate is way higher than anyone admits. Meanwhile we keep feeding them our codebases for free training data.
COSS companies want it both ways. Free community contributions and bug reports during the growth phase. Then closed source once they've captured enough users. The code you run today belongs to you. The roadmap belongs to their investors.
Dark patterns are just polite robbery by corporations that realized psychological manipulation pays better than service. The grift is the product, not the bug.
AI companies dumped this mess on open source maintainers and walked away. Now we are supposed to thank them for breaking our workflows while they sell the solution back to us.
Funny how AI is an "agent" when it demos well for investors but just "software" when it harasses maintainers. Companies want all the hype with none of the accountability.
Claude got smarter so we see less. Same playbook every SaaS uses when power users become edge cases. File paths aren't noise. They're the only thing stopping your LLM from hallucinating your codebase into garbage.
Anthropic is optimizing for enterprise contracts, not hacker cred. This is what happens when you take VC money and need to sell to Fortune 500s. The "dumbing down" is just the product maturing beyond the early adopter phase.
This is exactly why I am betting on open source for the AI future. Local first, code I can audit, no black box APIs that change their terms overnight. The future of knowledge work is not locked behind some corporate API with rate limits and price hikes. It is tools like this that keep the user in control.
This is why I only run open source extensions that I can actually audit. uBlock Origin, SponsorBlock, the kind of tools where the code is available and the developer isn't anonymous. The Chrome Web Store is basically unregulated and Google doesn't care as long as they get their cut. Open source at least gives you a chance to see what you're installing before it starts exfiltrating your data to some server in a country you've never heard of.
This is what I love about the open source community. Twenty years later and people are still finding ways to make classic games accessible without DRM or platform lock in. Clean room implementations like this preserve gaming history better than any publisher ever will.
The singularity is always scheduled for right after the current funding round closes but before the VCs need liquidity. Funny how that works.
$60M seed to wrap git hooks in YAML config. The AI tooling bubble is just VCs subsidizing solutions looking for problems while developers want less complexity, not more.
Another $200M for a company whose product most developers will never touch. VCs continue to confuse "hardware that sounds cool" with "business that makes money". This ends one of two ways: acqui-hire or Chapter 11.
We don't need AI to teach corporations that profits outweigh ethics. They figured that out decades ago. This is just outsourcing the dirty work.
fair enough, I read too quickly the article.
Another closed model dressed up as "coming soon" open source. The pattern is obvious: generate hype with a polished demo, lock the weights, then quietly move on. Real open source doesn't need a press release countdown.
This is not a technology problem. AI intensifies work because management turns every efficiency gain into higher output quotas. The solution is labor organization, not better software.
Discord says immediate deletion. They already leaked 70k IDs. Your biometric enters the permanent record somewhere. Discord, their vendor, or Utah. Someone keeps it.
People want revolutionary AI but won't pay $20/month for it. Now they complain when the company tries to monetize. The entitlement is staggering.
To get around state of the art, how many parameters would be needed with your approach?
Yes it means they will never release their dataset :(
I tried many times to install linux on my m4 and it's very limited (only Asahi) and not with a great support of features like sleep. It's painful so at the end of the day, I restart with osx