arrowsmith

You’re getting a negative reaction from others but I share this feedback in good faith: I don’t understand what problem your product is supposed to solve.

Yeah I guess the cryptographic stuff sounds vaguely impressive although it’s been a long time since I had to think about cryptography in detail. But what is this _for_? I’m going to buy an expensive keyboard so that I can send messages to someone and they’ll know it’s really me – but it has to be someone who a) doesn’t trust me or any of our existing communication channels and b) cares enough to verify using this weird software? Oh and it’s important they know I sent it from a particular device out of the many I could be using?

Who is that person? What would I be sending them? What is the scenario where we would both need this?

Also the server can’t read the message but the decryption key is in the URL? So anyone with the URL can still read it? Then why even bother encrypting it?

Maybe this is one of those cases where I’m so far outside your target market that it was never supposed to make sense to me but I feel like I’m missing something here. Or maybe you need to work on your elevator pitch.

Just sharing my honest reaction.

It’s a product for people who need help telling whether text was written by AI.

Maybe they deliberately write it like that, to filter out people who aren’t the target market?

From their “how it works” page:

> The server stores an encrypted blob it can't decrypt. We couldn't read your messages even if we wanted to. That's not a policy — it's math.

If you can’t tell that this is AI slop then maybe KeyWitness does solve a real problem after all.

None of that matters if the model is worse. I say this as someone who uses both Claude Code and Codex all day every day — I agree with others in this thread that CC has much better UX and evolves faster, but I still use Codex more often because it's simply the better coder. Everything else is a distant second to model quality.

Do we know what the other emergency was? All the reporting I've seen has been very vague on this.

Why not both? If it paid better then more people would apply to ATC school.

It's even infecting the highest levels of government:

https://www.pimlicojournal.co.uk/p/mps-are-almost-certainly-...

> UK where cost of energy was super high

“Was”?

Not that I’m going to do it myself, but what’s to stop a non-black person from signing up? Do you verify people’s identities?

I don’t really care if some group that doesn’t include me wants to exercise their freedom of association — whatever, it’s a free internet, go do your thing — but my lord it’s amusing to see Bluesky keep purging itself via these endless purity spirals.

Some people really can’t stand their own company.

They measure the number of minutes since sunrise.

oh no, basic border security!

The EU is launching a similar scheme that costs €20 to apply for: https://travel-europe.europa.eu/en/etias

It's incredible what people were able to accomplish with their free time before smartphones

For a split second I read this headline as "Terence Tao dead at … years old" and was shocked

He didn't name it though, Peter Steinberger did. (Kinda.)

"were"?

So?

> Were there similar gnashing of the teeth and wails of despair when compilers were first introduced?

Yes, at least according to ChatGPT:

"Compilers didn’t arrive to universal applause; they arrived into a world where a chunk of programmers absolutely believed the machine could not be trusted to write “real” code—until the productivity wins (and eventually the performance) became undeniable."

Damn that sounds familiar.

I don't understand this perspective. I've never learned so much so fast as I have in the last few months. LLMs automate all the boring rote stuff, freeing up my time to focus exclusively on the high-level problem-solving. I'm enjoying my work more than ever.

To be fair, I might have felt some grief initially for my old ways of working. It was definitely a weird shift and it took me a while to adjust. But I've been all-in on AI for close to a year now, and I have absolutely zero regrets.

I can't believe I used to _type code out by hand_. What a primitive world I grew up in.

Speak for yourself. I don't miss writing code at all. Agentic engineering is much more fun.

And this surprises me, because I used to love writing code. Back in my early days I can remember thinking "I can't believe I get paid for this". But now that I'm here I have no desire to go back.

I, for one, welcome our new LLM overlords!

The CIA World Factbook is a tertiary source.

"Irregardless"

> They are more than that, for example the frontmatter and code files around them.

You are right. I have edited my post slightly.

> Why do I want to throw away my dependency management system and shared libraries folder for putting scripts in skills?

You don't have to put scripts in skills. The script can be anywhere the agent can access. The skill just needs to tell the LLM how to run it.

> Does it even make sense to have skills in the repo? How do I use them across projects?

You don't have to put them in the repo. E.g. with Claude Code you can put project-specific skills in `.claude/skills` in the repo and system-wide skills in `~/.claude/skills`.

All the more reason to standardise it

Skills are a really simple concept. They're just custom prompts with a name and some metadata. What are you afraid of handcuffing?

No connotations or associations that I can think of it. It just sounds weird and is kinda hard to pronounce - doesn't roll off the tongue easily.

It's not the worst thing ever, it's just not a very aesthetically pleasing combination of sounds.

It's in TFA: "WhatsApp Relay"

Claude sounds like "clawed". Hence "Clawdbot".

Lobsters have claws.

It wasn't just one random asshole, tons of people were saying that "Moltbot" is a terrible name. (I agree, although I didn't tweet at him about it.)

OpenClaw is a million times better.