gtsop

To which citizens are you talking to exactly? There are a few very rich citizens that always had control of the government and clrealy want this bill to pass.

On the other hand there is a majority of other citizens which don't have the economic means, who are the victims of this bill, they never haf control of the government and don't want this bill to pass.

Classless "citizens" don't exist. This is capitalism working as usual. Oh, and get in touch with reality please, there is no country where "citizens" don't have guns, it's just not all the citizens.

I see your point but no, it's getting objectively worse. I have a similar experience of casually using chatgpt for various use cases, when 5 dropped i noticed it was very fast but oddly got some details off. As time moved on it became both slower and the output deteriorated.

Over 10 years writting front ends. I hate react, but this article is junk, it advocates for new "reacts". This exact mentality is what got us the bad parts of React, and it's going to give us the bad parts of whatever next library.

All the problems that react faces had already been solved by another framework, YEARS in advance. That framework is ember.js. And you know why? Because react started out as an view layer library, it was not meant to be a full blown front end framework from the beginning and it paid the price. But hipsters kept looking at how fast it rendered 10 million rows instead of focusing on what actually matters FOR EVERY TOOL YOU USE:

SCALABILITY!!!

Does your tool scale? ALL freaking frameworks feel great while writting Todo MVC. But how does feel writting a huge app? That's where decisions matter. And ember.js got these decisions right, everyone is reinventing those decisions (in worse ways) and calling it innovation. You're not innovating, you are reinventing a wheel, having not even learned your lesson from previous experience.

Having done that rant, and having said i hate react, react has become mature enough (with a big ecosystem) to let you do your job decently enough. Give me a freaking break. Let me use a tool for 3 years without having to re-learn a new API.

I know the whole story in depth and you keep iterating over the same thing.

If this person has indeed mental issues, to publicly expose it in a degrading light does not help him, or anyone else really.

If he doesn't have mental issues then all this discussion is unjustly defaming a person and damaging perception around mental issues.

Either way this discussion is bad.

You are the one portraying the project as unreliable. I only judge GrapheneOS by the actual output being delivered, the code and and the binary that is. And if you go down the route of validating the output based on his behaviour then i would flip it on you. I would much rather use an OS developed by a paranoid guy who thinks everyone hunts them. I'd bet it's more secure.

But this is silly-talk. What matters is the deliverable. Has the project given any evidence of being unreliable or not teustworthy?

I am sick of people raising this developer's mental issues. This is 2025, we should be sympathetic and encouranging to any human being struggling with mental issues, helping them get through or at least not trip them or sideline them. GrapheneOS is undeniably a project of great value, if you don't like something about it's development raise it and stop there as you would do with any project. Stop the "Graphene doesn't have X feature but the lead dev is nuts so I don't touch it" meme.

When you do MCP-style applications, an LLM is more like RegEx on steroids, and since you expect your regex to return the same matches on the same input, it is a very desirable attribute for LLMs as well. I would say it is more than desirable, it is necessary.

If i want to covert "how do I x" to `api.howTo("x")` it is very important that i get the exact same result every time.

> if the tool was that good people would be beating down their doors to get it.

Microsoft is a software company. They wouldn't have released this to begin with to have an extreme competitive edge!

Your response is an exact proof of what I said in my comment. Thanks

Edit: Ok elaboration for the well intended. There is a HUGE overlap of LSP and ACP. LSP solves the problem of "oh we have many IDEs and many language integration plugins, we have an NxM problem, let's make it a N+M". ACP goes to do exactly that but for agents (which is an implementation detail), which means they could very well piggy back on top of LSP

Because there is no ai hype in LSP. AI is literally going through the same phase as early javascript libraries did. An explosion of tools, completely ignoring/bypassing previous accumulated knowledge, solving the wrong problems with the wrong tools.

And this will pile up the bloat stack, similar to js libraries, because new problems will rise from the wrong solutions, requiring even more wrong solutions to be incorporated in the stack.

Show us the numbers, stop wasting our time. NUMBERS.

Also, why would I ever believe kangaroos exist if I haven't seen any evidence of them? this is a fallacy. You are portraying the healthy skepticism as stupid because you already know kangaroos exist.

No i don't but by your post it seems like you do. Show us, that is all i request.

Two years in and we are waiting to see all you people (who are free of our tunnel vision) fly high with your velocity. I don't see anyone, am I doing something wrong?

Your words predict an explosion of unimaginary magnitude for new code and for new buisnesses. Where is it? Nowhere.

Edit: And dont start about how you vibed a SaaS service, show income numbers from paying customers (not buyouts)

This classic reductionist argument is so trivial it could havr been automatically posted by an LLM.

The majority of those people say they regreted the collapse of the Soviet Union. Not sure where your fantasy facts of "did not work" come from.

While the reasoning I believe to be utterly littered with weak arguments, I agree with the final conclusion/question of the author.

But what the author isn't clearly saying is that he is describing a free market opposed to a planned economy, even if he doesn't specificly say that, that's the implication of the final question.

And I am all for planned economy. I want to cooperate with my human fellows, not compete to crush them. In this day and age it is obsurd not to this. The technology is there, we just need to use it the right way. I know many will do a knee-jerk reaction to this statement and start spitting out the old anti-soviet economy arguments about planned economy, I'm bracing.

If you want competition then accept the social outcomes. Wanting to equalize competition through regulation is exactly like banning war crimes. When war is raging all kinds of war crimes will be commited.

> If some people can't be reasoned with, what is Rossmann supposed to do ?

Just stop interacting? When you have an argument with your colleague, do you go on twitter and post all your conversations and tell everyone how irrational he is? When you argue with a relative do you make an 1hour long video detailing how they missbehaved? Why did Luis felt the need to make content on his popular channel to expose someone with problematic behavior?

Clicks. Money.

And on top of that he is attacking his work which is actually very valuable.

I don't care if Luis is on the right side of the argument. If he was chatting me up on the bus and told me about it, i would be glad to know. Attacking a person on public for money and leverage is bs.

Edit: Especially in the case of Daniel, if you have made the conclusion that a person is trully paranoid, this is a clinical situation, do you expect to "fix" them by exposing them? Or are you throwing more gas to the fire?

Is it really a strawman? At some point, the code would need to identify rossmann. Please elaborate on the techniques required to do it and how it could be obfuscated.

GOS doesn't use an account, so the code would have to perform very targeted heuristics in order to verify this is Luis' phone. It would have to compare his sim number against a known one, or dig into application data to find his logins and compare them against known emails. So the only way to not write `if (user is rossmann)` would be to send various diagnostics over the wire, to a service that contains these identifiers and perform the comparison onlinr, meaning he would introduce an imense security whole into everyone's phone, and everyone would see there is a home calling.

So it's either a patch of if user == rossmann, or a home calling patch.

> Just curious, but who is muddying waters, and how ?

In the context of this whole rabbit hole, pretty much all of the parties.

When you bring someone's dirt put in the public, not to support an argument but just to attack them because you don't like them, uou are muddying the waters.

MegaLag did it for Linus

Steve did for Linus

Luis did for Linus

Linus did for Steve

Linus did for Luis

Henry did for Daniel

Luis did for Daniel

And of course Daniel pretty much does for anyone :p

These were not conversations based on logic, each had a reason to dislike the other and dag up dirt for clicks and for leverage.

So rossmann literally feared of a patch that was like this getting into graphene

if (user is rossmann) {

  // do bad things

}

makes me think who is paranoid here.

As a long time GOS user I just want to remind what a joy it is to see my very old phone outlive flagships due to the lack of bloatware. I upgrade phones just for a single reason: it has been physically hit so hard over the years that it stops being physically functional.

This is a very interesting summary indeed, however I think matters are simpler and noone needs to dive that deep.

Unfortunatelly, EVERYONE, from all parties, fire shots for the wrong reasons, which perverts the discussion.

When you say to people to not use GOS because the lead dev is paranoid or the community is hostile you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The value GOS brings is undisputable. The quirkiness of the leadership is also undisputable. Let's decouple the two. If you wish for the community to get better, become yourself the better contact point amd generally focus on suggestion on that matter. Don't say to people to not use arguably the most secure android rom!

I used to respect Rossmann a lot, but he fell in my eyes both for the LTT and the GOS incident. I have been watching LTT since a kid and I know that his has grown to be a jerk without looking at his private communications, but his competitors fired shots at him for the wrong reasons (honey case) and so did Rossmann, riding the wave.

If you want to criticize someone for being a jerk do it, but do it for the right reasons, don't muddy the waters by injecting other stuff in the discussion.

Can you elaborate on why this is a risk factor? What do you mean by saying we're giving him root? If a person is paranoid of being chased i would expect them to put even more effort into the security of the OS he develops, not to add backdoors. But please expand your own reasoning.

What was the initial incentive for people to publish on the internet before ad revenue was a thing?

Why on earth are you accepting his premise that there are billions of successful requests? I just asked chatgpt about query success rate and it replied (part):

"...Semantic Errors / Hallucinations On factual queries—especially legal ones—models hallucininate roughly 58–88% of the time

A journalism‑focused study found LLM-based search tools (e.g., ChatGPT Search, Perplexity, Grok) were incorrect in 60%+ of news‑related queries

Specialized legal AI tools (e.g., Lexis+, Westlaw) still showed error rates between 17% and 34%, despite being domain‑tuned "

> more like 'thinking' than 'knowing'.

it's neither, really.

> After all, they are designed to apply logical relationships between input nodes

They are absolutelly not. Unless you assert that logical === statistical (which it isn't)

> There is zero intelligence on it

100% with you.

LLM is good enough i believe. No need to invent anything new.

Right now they only thing being left behind is my actual work to be done since I am spending more and mpre time fighting off cursor-written degenerate slop code from creeping into the codebase from "pioneer" developers who are slowly forgetting how to program.

> that senior devs are extremely in demand

Is this true? I am not seeing salaries rising, the demand seems to be met. But maybe I'm wrong.

Care to explain? I am honestly clueless

> don't know if you have ever worked in a larger team that lacked someone to make decisions, take responsibility and set a strategy

I had once. The ultra micro-managing boss went to surgery and was off for two months. The whole company happily cruised along, numbers kept going up, his toxic pressure was absent, people kept working and making things.

I don't know how it would go for long term, but these were some of the best months.

If you don't need to prove it to me then you you wouldn't have replied to my initial comment to begin with.

But I agree, you don't need to prove anything to me. You need to proove it to yourself first.