_2d30

I feel like that article doesn't really live up to its title. At the end, its basic point is that MCP isn't a magic bullet (I don't think anyone claimed it was?) and that it has a lot of hype. It also makes it clear why MCP is good (ie don't need to rely on LangChain). Feels like its title should be "Why MCP is a Good Step but Doesn't Solve Agents" or something. But then, it wouldn't enable the millenial urge to use "shit".

My "LOL" is at people condescendingly trying to prove things like "Germany called the concentration camps luxurious places to hangout and learn skills and rehabilitate, with post office, frequent movie screenings, a swimming pool, nice beds" with sources which repeatedly don't do that in any way.

I literally have no idea what you're talking about. This is what I linked to: https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/deceiving-...

Which if you had clicked and read you would see comes from the US Holocaust museum and is heavily focused on Theresienstadt. I was making a point that you're not really interested in engaging with anything I'm writing and are instead focused on just getting your own point across as evidenced by your use of "Theresienstadt" as a point in reply.

Fascinating. Never heard of it. What did you think about the source I linked to?

> If my system regularly ships bugs, then yes, it's purpose is apparently to regularly ship bugs. If my system ships rarely bugs, then yes, it's purpose is apparently to rarely ship bug

The purpose of Linux is to ship bugs: https://www.cvedetails.com/product/47/Linux-Linux-Kernel.htm...

Genius stuff here. Crazy how many people use an operating system whose literal purpose according to you is to ship bugs.

This is one of the dumbest things people say constantly.

Remember this the next time you ship a bug! You built a system whose purpose was to have that bug in it.

I’m not saying it’s exempt from criticism and honestly I don’t know how that could possibly be an interpretation of that. I’m literally calling it incompetent which is clearly criticism. I’m saying that a 2wk detention due to glacial pace of our shitty bureaucracy isn’t really “fishy” about anything.

And to be clear, they aren’t innocent in the referenced example. They were breaking the terms of their visa.

LOL yeah this really paints them in a positive light. If this is the best resource you have for how the Nazis propagandized their concentration camps (this is literally right after the earliest ones opened so you would expect whatever propaganda to be as strong as possible then) as “luxurious” then I’m going to land on that not being the case.

> At most of the camps privileges are few. Major Kauffman, head of the big Heuberg camp in Wuerttemberg, said his prisoners were allowed to write one letter a month. There are no visiting days there.

It literally even calls them political concentration camps in the article.

AFAICT, this wasn't actually how the Germans framed the concentration camps at all. The article you responded to is about how a woman described them in 2010.

The closest thing I can find is here: https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/deceiving-...

And this film was never even shown broadly as it was made near the end of the war. Also, it's technically for a ghetto and not a concentration camp.

No AI I've asked and no links I've found suggest that concentration camps were broadly propagandized as anything similar to "wellness farms".

Seems like a waste to update the curricula every few years to include, for example, some random lady who published a holocasut denail book in 2010 as referenced in that source. Doesn't seem very useful pedagogically!

If by "back then", you mean 2010, then yeah.

But if you still mean that the specific term "wellness farm" COULD have been used as a euphemism for concentration camps (regardless of whether or not it ever was), then what's the point? Like people also COULD have used the term "suburb" as euphemism for a concentration camp. Should we also be skeptical of anyone who says they want to build suburbs? What's even the point of of saying that a term COULD have been used as euphemism historically?

Your source for this is an article that takes down a description from a book that was written in 2010. Not sure if you quite caught that on your thorough reading of it.

I don’t quite remember and would have to ask. I think he was detained for 5 days, maybe?

> Because two weeks in jail what could be a simple flight home sounds fishy.

The inefficiency of American institutions is nearly limitless. Don’t put too much stock in the glacial pace of our bureaucracy as being malicious when it happens everywhere else out of broad incompetence.

> That’s not hysterical it‘s cautious.

Again, I agree that there are a few stories of deportations that are legitimate causes for concern about hosting a conference with internationals in the US. But if you use people getting deported for overstaying their visas as a part of justifying that concern, then that is hysterical. It conflates issues that are effectively totally unrelated to one another.

It would be like claiming it’s not safe to travel to Italy because the local justice systems will charge you with trumped up charges and quote both the Amanda Knox case as well as cases where Americans actually broke the law and got charged justly. Only the Amanda Knox case is actual justification for the claim!

Oh so you mean it wasn’t used that way in a historical context? Got it.

In what historical context was “wellness farm” used as a euphemism?

Yes and some of the links to the “traumatizing” deportations are for people who are clearly in violation of their visas.

I had a friend deported from Denmark when he overstayed his visa and it was basically the same thing.

Some of these look really bad and could be sensible justification for the proposed boycott/cancellation (see French scientist eg) but a lot of it looks completely hysterical.

> Artificial humans should have equal rights as real humans.

This is ridiculous and plain evil.

I don't think it should. If a user asks the AI to read the web for them, it should read the web for them. This isn't a vacuum charged with crawling the web, it's an adhoc GET request.

> Pennywise pound foolish and harming UX at the same time. They could just require that Spotify logs the plays and uploads them on the next connection. Resulting in more plays and more money. But instead they block it for the 0.1% of the time that the watch is lost, destroyed or reinstalled before that sync happens.

Why are you just blindly accepting their vapid evidenceless postulation lol

The most interesting question arising from this is the meta-question: who leaked this meeting and why?

Yes I’m always very surprised that people deal with the awful software that are on the TVs.

I use an Apple TV which, while a relatively expensive solution, has a clean interface and integrates well with the rest of my hardware. Plus rarely are there ads being shoved in your face in the OS/Home Screen. Apps can still do as they like of course.

> areas that serve a more expensive area of properties receives way more funding.

This actually isn't true in general. Baltimore (poor city) city schools, eg, spend twice as much as Carmel Indiana (wealthy city) does per pupil.

The link between education outcomes and spend is extremely weak.

They didn't teach this in high school!!!

FWIW, your quote doesn't support a food shortage being a cause since it says nothing about the relative change of total planted acreage.

My experience in America is largely one of the following:

American person on social media (and, yes, I would claim HN is social media) claims "They never taught us this in school!!!" with many agreeing emphatically.

... and 90+% of the time I remember specifically being taught it. Most people don't remember much of their educations.

Because it may lead to new classes of high temperature ambient pressure superconductors. Maybe even leading to room temperature + pressure superconductors.

Got it, thanks!

I'm a bit confused on how the LastPass hack enabled the loss of passwords. I assume it works the way that I understand 1Password to work which should mean this would still be very difficult to impossible to do. Can anyone explain what I'm wrong about in terms of how the password managers work or how LastPass works differently?

So the way that I understand 1Password to work is that the decryption key is split in two: the user's single password + a secret key. You need both to decrypt the vault. The secret key is, again according to my understanding, generated randomly and is like 128bits? Once 1Password generates it and sends it to you (maybe they don't even send it and it is generated locally, I don't know), they never see it again. Thus, even if your vault were stolen, the thieves would need to crack your password (very likely not that secure) but also the 128 bit secret key so you would have a minimum of 128bit security which seems fine?

What's different about LastPass? Were the secret keys stolen somehow too? Were the targets of the stolen vaults then hit with further attacks to extract the secret keys? Does LastPass not use a similar structure as 1Password? Or am I actually not as safe as I thought using 1Password?

I don’t engage with people who make unsupported statements with rhetorical aims on their own terms.

I still think it’s France. There’s a good reason for so many cities being named Lafayette

Why are you asking me? I already said this article that half of HN is raging at is scant on any detail. If you don’t know the answers to these questions, which would make sense because this article basically says nothing, and it’s important to you you should probably look into it.