fhub

For a less simplistic look at a similar question I'd recommend this article.

https://hyperfocusinhalifax.substack.com/p/why-arent-oil-pri...

The current A/B test I seem to be in is that bad. But it will likely drive the metrics they are trying to drive.

Then just write the extra paragraph rather than bait?

Where ORMs are clearly weak is in generating suboptimal queries and making it too easy to create N+1 issues. My first introduction to ORMs was Ruby on Rails. You would rely on New Relic to identify performance issues and then fix them.

With solid AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md, I do not think this would happen as much anymore in new code. So then it is just a matter of style preference (ORM vs whatever else).

Profit is just one metric that affects the stock. YoY Revenue growth was historically in 40s and high 30% year on year. But last year was sub 20%. Investors are re-evaluation SaaS company multiples through a new lens of AI. Personally I wonder if Fortune 500 can renegotiate lower margin pricing with the "We could just build this with AI in house" BATNA argument.

The best task management solution is the one you just moved to as it doesn't have years of junk in it.

Targeting intel was apparently based off ~2013 satellite imagery. By 2016, satellite images show the school was separate and outside the fence. (From https://edition.cnn.com/2026/03/06/middleeast/iran-minab-ele...)

Israel tracked him and killed him with a Blue Sparrow missile.

We were taught Literate Programming and xtUML at university. In both courses, the lecturers (independently) tried to convince us that these technologies were the future. I also did an AI/ML course. That lecturer lamented that the golden era was in the past.

I do something similar but I get Claude to review Codex every step of the way and feed it back (or visa versa depending on day)

The “maker movement” isn’t dead and it wasn’t born recently either. People have been DIYing for all sorts of reasons for very long time.

If you are interested in learning about the other perspective, you can watch some parents’ congressional testimony here https://youtu.be/y8ddg4460xc?si=-yYduYDppF4TQWqD.

The character.ai one is gut wrenching.

The lone ranger may have actually done something optimal but indirect. There is a lot of press that went global pointing out real problems. Japanese are proud people, this might actually help direct public funds to solve the problems.

Right now I'll pay 2x for a subjectively 20+% better coding agent. But in a year I don't think there will be an agent that to me is subjectively 20% better amongst the big three.

> Opus feels more like a guy to me, while Codex feels like a machine

I use one to code and the other to review. Every few days I switch who does what. I like that they are different it makes me feel like I'm getting different perspectives.

He is likely working on a very clean codebase where all the context is already reachable or indexed. There are probably strong feedback loops via tests. Some areas I contribute to have these characteristics, and the experience is very similar to his. But in areas where they don’t exist, writing code isn’t a solved problem until you can restructure the codebase to be more friendly to agents.

Even with full context, writing CSS in a project where vanilla CSS is scattered around and wasn’t well thought out originally is challenging. Coding agents struggle there too, just not as much as humans, even with feedback loops through browser automation.

They use the word "Sonnet" 60+ times on that page but never give the casual reader any context of what a "Sonnet model" actually is. Neither does their landing page. You have to scroll all the way to the footer to find a link under the "Models" section. You click it and you finally get the description

"Hybrid reasoning model with superior intelligence for agents, featuring a 1M context window"

You then compare that to Opus Model description

"Hybrid reasoning model that pushes the frontier for coding and AI agents, featuring a 1M context window"

Is the casual person meant to decide if "Superior" is actually less powerful than "Frontier"?

I do appreciate this note more than others. It is food for thought. I think it could have been worded a lot more respectfully though.

He'll likely file in California or Federal and ask for Jury trial. I think a Jury will be sympathetic. I doubt Google will want this to go to a jury trial - not worth the risk, further news cycles of negative PR and impact on staff morale. NPR is credible and liked.

Door close button is supposed to cancel the door dwell time. But due to some disability codes in some regions all major manufactures allow it to be disabled (as required by some codes). i.e. The owners/managers/technicians can disable it.

I thought by not naming it wouldn't shift the focus to the particular model, but it did the opposite. It was gpt-5.3-codex in medium mode.

Even with automated tests you'd need to think of this exploit right? Perhaps fuzzing would have got it. The mailing lists says they proved it successful on

- OpenIndiana

- FreeBSD

- Debian GNU/Linux

So not complete YOLO.

See https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-inetutils/2015-03/msg...

FWIW, a well known LLM agent, when I asked for a review of the patch, did suggest it was dodgy but didn't pick up the severity of how dodgy it was.

My wife, who was on a H1B visa and managed to fly without an ID a few years back. They took her to some side room, asked a bunch of questions and looked her up based on name, DOB, address etc.

The use case claimed here is (a) they can move around (b) they are "universal".

But

(a) Those things look like they need a wide berth to move around and flat terrain

(b) Those end effectors are far from universal. The payload weight seems so low that it even dropped an empty box at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FIXjy2GWTg&t=150s

This feels like the start of treasure hunt like game. Between username of rabinovich (as others have pointed out) and the prior submission by rabinovich of an archive.today like tool 3 months ago - https://ghostarchive.org/. When you click into the search query examples for ghostarchive such as this one https://ghostarchive.org/search?term=https://docs.google.com. Many of the documents are very weird indeed.

It feels to me like this should have gone through private arbitration rather than public accusations.

Do you let it consume PII? Anything related to authenticaion?

What is new to me is that people let LLMs consume PII and potentially authentication related data. This, frankly, is scary to me.

Are you comfortable giving LLM read access to fields that have PII? Anything related to authentication? Is it allow-list of access or a deny-list?

Our solve is to allow it to work with a local dev database and it's output is a script. Then that script gets checked into version control (auditable and reviewed). Then that script can be run against production. Slower iteration but worth the tradeoff for us.

Giving LLM even read access to PII is a big "no" in my book.

On PII, if you need LLMs to work on production extracted data then https://github.com/microsoft/presidio is a pretty good tool to redact PII. Still needs a bit of an audit but as a first pass does a terrific job.