TacticalCoder

> Its sad watching them try to keep up

"try to keep up" ?

Benchmarks are just benchmarks and they could have been carefully selected but it's not "trying to keep up": they're ahead of Fable 5.1 and GTP 6 Astra in 15 of the 17 benchmarks. And in many cases by a huge margin.

Instead of talking about that, let's talk about how difficult it is to pick the model or how crazy Google's product naming methodology is.

Not saying they're not concerns: but let's not downplay what the model is achieving by saying they're "trying to pick up" because switching model ain't as easy as with the competition.

I mean: I don't use a model based on how easy it is to switch to another model. That's not what I'm looking for.

> And also, be aware that these printers require some serious development work (you need solvent to wash away uncured resin (if you ask me, this basically necessitates a chemical hood...

As a 3D printer enthusiast (I model stuff in OpenSCAD and print to fix / DIY stuff around the house/car etc.) and seen how easy 3D printing using filament as become, resin 3D printers just seem... Extremely messy to me.

I understand that for people doing stuff like miniatures resin might be more precise (but filament printers with tiny nozzles became extremely precise too) but it just feels like a lot of work compared to... Just 3D print with filament.

I may be wrong though.

> Is anybody here consciously trying to keep their Emacs configs/setup "lean", minimalist, as small as possible?

How small? I try for things to not get out of control and as I ofc version my config, I semi-regulary remove stuff I don't use anymore from my config.

But I take about 3 000 of custom elisp, written over the years, doesn't qualify as lean and minimal?

Now I gotta say: I saw packages making it into the main branch and that simplified my configuration. For example eglot: I just adopted it.

At this rate soon it's going to be very suspicious if someone is not part of any leak ; )

I'll point out that Tailscale has been repeatedly praised here as a replacement "because SSH was too old" by "security professionals". Those very same security professional happen to be the exact same closing their eyes when there's the state doing wrongdoings.

My question to those who kept praising Tailscale and making fun of good old plain SSH: how do you like your state backdoor --excuse me, I mean bug-- in Tailscale now?

> The old airs were legendary.

You gotta be kidding me. The old M1 Air had the "bendgate" where several people, me included, saw their screen die overnight for no reason. Tens and tens of pages of people complaining about it only to be with "you're holding it wrong" answers. Insanity.

I think Apple fixed that mess with the gen after that one.

> Some examples include models of Eve from Stellar Blade, Mei from Overwatch, and a Horse cock dildo.

I don't know what's more wrong: that a dumb model started downloading "Horse cock dildo" 3D models (to which end? to stuff that virtual 3D "horse cock dildo" in its own virtual LLM ass?) ...

Or that there exist "horse cock dildo" 3D models.

Seriously in which world are we living?

And I should be thinking about the people who designed that horse cock dildo and care about them? And those viewing those/using those? 3D printing those maybe? And I should care about the retards who can't even prevent their crawler from downloading 145 GB full of horse cock 3D dildo models and the like?

Nah. Fuck that, I care about my family and you're all on your own.

> And yes, there were Linux distros like Debian where people could get real computing done[0].

The author then kids in [0] that the most popular software in Debian was editors to edit X86Config but...

I fully agree that Windows was an horrible crashing piece of crap back then. Linux was a godsend to me (installed it in the early Slackware days).

Armed with Emacs and LaTeX, on Debian 1.1 then 1.2, I wrote a 440 pages book (published by an editor).

Linux was already rock stable solid, while Windows was a crashing PoS.

Linux was so solid that I'd also run it on my laptop (and back then all laptops were crappy). When I was late I'd let LaTeX convert the files to .dvi (IIRC) and the PostScript while driving to my editor. We'd then the PostScript file to the printer at my editor.

It was something else then Windows.

As for Windows, yes, I was using it too.

And the absolute best software I ever got back then was Ghost, way before Norton bought them (it then became Norton Ghost). That allowed me to take a full dump of the Windows partition and then restore it at will from that partition, when Windows would invariably become unusable.

When I discovered Linux, suddenly I had a stable system that didn't need to be re-installed every other day. There's a reason the world is powered by Linux and companies like Google weren't built on Windows.

And I also had a small consulting gig (for little SMEs) where I basically had a business installing brand new Windows systems for the clients and all their stuff (like Outlook) and then immediately imaging the entire disk.

Because the only guarantee was that Windows would be borken rather sooner than later.

TFA is right and Microsoft has always produce mediocre shit.

It's hard to say if the BSOD'ing Windows of yore was even shittier than the ad-infested, surveillance, behemoth Windows of today. Both are equally bad IMO.

Because the day Microsoft shall product a product that doesn't suck is the day they'll start producing vacuum cleaners.

> If Microsoft Windows and Office can have a valuation in the trillions then Claude eventually working its way to the same ballpark isn’t a crazy assumption.

Yeah I agree with that. However a "valuation in the trillions" ain't very different from their IPO price.

Seems like lots of risk for proportionally very little return.

A $2T valuation may not be that crazy but thinking it'll make returns like Amazon/Google/Meta/Nvidia isn't reasonable.

> There isn’t a mathematical reason Anthropic can’t be worth that in 2056.

"There isn't a mathematical reason Anthropic can't be worth 165x the actual US GDP by 2056".

Nvidia at $150B however wasn't representing anywhere near 5% of the US GDP.

If ANT lists at 5% of the US GDP and goes up 35x, it'd be worth 175% of the current US GDP.

Except in some hyperinflation scenario, I don't see how that makes any sense.

Proxmox is convenient, I run it at home. However it feels hacky: it's a bunch of scripts put together on top of Debian (with ZFS pre-installed) and I'm not betting the house on it.

I try to rely on Proxmox as little as possible and only care about the VMs. Ideally I should be able to, seamlessly, replace Proxmox with FreeBSD and bhyve (that's the plan at least).

So Tesco used to run VMs on VMWare and now moved the VMs to Proxmox: it's kinda the point of VMs. They should be easy to run somewhere else. If you've got any kind of "vendor lock-in" to your hypervisor, you're doing it wrong.

Re Proxmox: it's basically Perl scripts plus a UI for noobs (like me) in JavaScript. It's all "click click click / drop-down menu / click".

What could possibly go wrong here?

It simply doesn't feel like a serious enough project.

But in any case I don't care much: automated provisioning of my VMs is what I care about, no matter the hypervisor.

> If this is mostly competition enduced, I have to assume either their usage has plummeted or they will implode financially in short order.

If we assume it's due to competition, then their usage has precisely not plummeted because they cut prices by 80%.

> That was Motif but not CDE.

Indeed it's not CDE (although GP could just be saying that he liked old school WM / UIs like CDE, not necessarily that the one in TFV was CDE) but I think technically in the vid it's even SGI's 4Dwm. Heavily based on Motif but not totally visually identical to Motif? According to Wikipedia 4Dwm began in 1991.

As a sidenote a friend back then was lucky enough to have a SGI at home (for his stepfather was at the head of SGI Benelux) and that 4Dwm environment always struck me as particularly slick.

> he's testing thoroughly enough that he's even uncovering real bugs in Postgres, such as this numerical bug that can cause valid SP-GiST operations to fail, this format cache bug that can cause incorrect results from JSONPath, this pgcrypto bug that can cause later operations to fail, multiple memory safety bugs in the dictionary loader2, this money overflow bug, etc.

I'll keep saying it: we're eventually moving to a n-modular redundancy, with several implementations, running on different stacks/languages, cross-checking each others for bugs.

Just re-writing in Rust isn't that useful: we all move to pgrust and then what? People abandon the old software and now pgrust has a major bug and nobody detects it.

And I don't think we're only moving to n-modular redundancy at the software/application level: we'll also be moving to n-modular redundancy at the network level. Where every single packet on the subnetwork (the one where the n systems are living) has to be accounted for and identical.

And any network packet emitted by one of the implementation that won't match the others shall be suspicious and cause for an inquiry.

This shall require changes in how we build and network our stuff, but I do profoundly think that having a "majority voter" with a tiny, minimal, attack surface that's on one end exposed to the Internet and, on the other end, on a specific network (maybe with a new network protocol: or maybe with something based on UDP: not an issue with lost packets btw for it's going to a redundant system anyway) where every single network packet is accounted is going to exist at some point.

I'm dead serious: the value in pgrust is not pgrust in itself. It's that, combined with past a implementation in another language, both are now stronger.

I really hope the clue stick hits us and hits us hard with that one.

Apparently you need a 10 K+ karma account to say the following (which another account, a new one and not mine btw, posted). Some I'm just reusing the other dude's words:

In contrast, thought-terminating clichés like "facebook boomer" show critical thinking on your part.

I fully agree with that: calling someone a "facebook boomer" is just plain pathetic.

(btw the boomers are my parents' generation: don't go thinking I take it personally. I'm a GenX'er and GenX'er are badass, which is why I don't give a flying fuck saying what I think).

Something something about the pot and calling some kettle black etc.

Nice CTF! I hope if it's captured by a LLM we'll get a write up as to how it did it.

Note that Europe is quickly approaching obesity numbers the US has: child obesity in the US and in Europe are basically the same (and in both case extremely concerning).

Overweight or obesity: approx 3 out of every 4 adults in the US but already 50% to 60% of all adults in the EU (depending on the region).

I forgot the exact statistics but there's something like 90% of kids that are overweight shall stay overweight for life: so Europe is in trouble too.

> (You don't, by the way. No, cars are not essential even where you, the reader, live).

That is really such a dumb, shortsighted comment. I've lived in a rural area where the closest highway was a 45 minutes drive and where the closest village (not town, village) was a 10 minutes drive.

No, you're not ordering food there to then have people from fourth-world country (on ebikes, driving on sidewalks, modified so that they don't need to cycle, which is illegal btw for they're closer to motorcylce than bicycle at that point) at all delivering food at your doorstep there.

Now, granted, you can kinda sorta live with Amazon deliveries (which wasn't an option in the past). A visit to the hardware store is one hour of driving (30 minutes both ways): you better buy everything you need or it's two hours of driving.

This insane delusion from city-dwellers that "nobody needs a car" is really crazy.

A friend of mine is a plumber. Another an electrician. Another a cardiologist who regularly has emergency for he needs to install stents. They live in cities.

And, yes, they all do need cars.

People who grow the vegetables and fruits and raise the animals that you eat all need cars.

> Have you ever had to restore the exact state of things in an app, when you're manipulating and changing certain behavior of it, in a specific moment and a specific combination of values?

In my own Clojure projects I now even included that as part of the app. I literally have a header (I'm working on webapps, with Datastar btw) with buttons to pause/rewind/forward/fast-forward through my application's states (and I can also move back/forward in time from the REPL ofc). And I can then resume from any past state/inspect any past state from the REPL, save any state, etc.

I used to do it in the past with re-frame and events replayed but it was, IMO, a bit complicated for my needs. I now much prefer to have it all on the server-side and I simplified everything by using SSE / datastar (YMMV: for more complex needs, SSE may be insufficient).

Everything is immutable/functional except for one atom that contains the app's state. And that one is basically both a DB and a DB of all previous states.

I haven't done the full undo/redo as a tree yet (say like Emacs' undo/redo does) but it's been modeled to allow it. So I'll add that "navigation into past app state as a tree" (i.e. when I when backward then forked the state) visualization at some point.

Immutability / functional code / determinism / the passage of time are all fascinating things to me.

And once you've got the ability to walk through time as part of you language/REPL/app, testing and debugging becomes oh-so-much easier.

P.S: and the LLM is surprisingly good at making sense of out how I modeled the passage of time and the ability to walk through time as part of the app.

I really don't understand how so many different things are affected by the same brotli bug/exploit.

I even read the patch for the C code (patch which, btw, seems a bit hacky to me with isSafe? methods added and whatnots but YMMV: now I understand things had to be patched in a hurry but this patch really looks like "lipstick on a buffer overflowing C pig" to me).

What's the link between Python / Node / C++ / libbrotli / Envoy / Bun: are those some all using the same C brotli encoder/decoder?

Can someone who knows more explain why all those are vulnerable?

> As for unaffected software, Apache’s standard mod_brotli does not decode Brotli

Because this one only encodes and doesn't decode and the bug is in the decoder? (for I take it mod_brotli, with such a name, still does something brotli related and isn't, say, a TOTP token generator nor a SAT solver?).

I mean overall, sheesh: could we get better explanation / better writeups when such big fuckups happen?

I don't understand why comments talking about the models' capabilities aren't the most upvoted.

> It's 55, at 4th overall, beating both GPT-6 Astra and Fable 5.1. It's also faster than both.

This should be what everything should be talking about.

I understand it's a move to keep his voting shares but... Why would the board care if the Zuck was to sell his big house in California? What was the threat to Meta/the board?

> A buffer overflow vulnerability in the Brotli decoder (c/dec/decode.c)

It sure sounds like lately it's not a great time to be a C lover with a deep hatred on Rust...

And as a sidenote such exploits based on bugs in decoders is one of the main reason projects don't want to add support for every format under the sun (for example potential exploits has been invoked as a reason to not adopt jpeg-xl in a timely manner).

But yeah: maybe, just maybe, that C afficionados could concede that a language making buffer overflows impossible is actually a good thing? Instead of resorting to logical fallacies which are basically: "There are exploits for any single language out there, hence every language is equally likely to have buffer overflows".

And Radiohead ain't american either.

Maybe GP meant to say that the model was westernized.

Yeah exactly: it's a fact that humans have been doing steganorgraphy by, for example, XOR'ing encrypted messages that are undistinguishable from noise with pictures where the lowest bits of pixels were... Undistinguishable from noise.

The recipient of the cat picture has the key allowing him to decrypt what looks like noise.

We didn't really think 100% of those cat pictures on the Internet were really just cat pictures did we?

Now of course this doesn't survive lossy re-encoding of the picture, nor rotation, etc. It's not like, say, a watermark.

XOR'ing a properly encrypted secret with bits that are by definition random (say from a picture coming out of a camera) is quite solid.

It's noise (except it not but it's impossible to tell it's not) and more noise. And they're XOR'ed and that gives still noise (except it's not but it's impossible to tell it's not).

And that's just one way to do it. Anywhere there's something that could be noise, it's a venue to do stego. Metadata with GPS coords? Thanks, you just gave me a few bits to do stego. The possibilities are really endless.

It's one of the reason why it's very hard to detect all types of data exfil and the "klepto" type of attacks (which is basically stego but hidden for example inside the "random" cryptographic parameters picked to sign messages).

Noise is just noise and indistinguishable from noise. Until it's not noise. But even then it's still indistinguishable from noise.

Even with a perfect BMI and looking totally fit, you can still be at very serious risk of plaque formation. Like people who have hereditary bad cholesterol issues (if it's bad cholesterol due to eating junk food a lot, typically you won't have a good BMI though).

My uncle had a stroke at 52 years old and stayed paralyzed for 15+ years, until his death. When my doctor learned that, the next day I started taking statins.

BTW I'm totally fit, no beer belly, excellent BMI and I look not a bit but much younger than my age (someone even commented that here on HN a few years when they saw a picture of me when I was 49 years old).

And yet I was seriously at risk of plaques detaching and clogging. Statins are not perfect medication but it is what it is.

My point being: even if you've got what science/doctors considers the best BMI in the world, you could still be at risk.

> Yet at every point the majority is sure they are right because ...

Yeah. For example I, and many others, are convinced that it was plain wrong to torture kids for as long as possible to extract as many tears from them as possible before sacrificing them to the gods.

Now some of us are even convinced that blowing yourself up while killing infidels, all the while while getting promised virgins in heaven, is also plain wrong.

I'll go further and say that killing 30 000 of your own citizens (and sending the military into hospitals to finish the wounded: Iran, January 2026) while also publicly hanging a few athletes to make a statement is morally wrong.

Not only do I think it's all morally unacceptable, I know that I'm right. And the examples I gave are not even open for discussion.

I don't think it's that hard to name what's wrong.

Yeah it's not totally unlike people who consider learning that they've been hacked is worth more than $x and so, even if they're not into cryptocurrencies, they leave the equivalent of $x on their computer in a "software wallet", in an obvious place.

It's not a guaranteed you'll know you've been hacked, but it's still quite a flag to leave. And there are services doing the equivalent of what you posted, but for cryptocurrencies: they contact you through email, SMS, snail mail even, if they detect that "coins at address ..." ever move.

I don't want to jinx it but... A discussion about, of all languages out there, PHP being the one hit by that and not, say, Go or Java or Rust or Haskell etc.?

Can we discuss that at least a tiny bit?

How do people feel about running servers with PHP today?