ljm

I have met more than one person who would doggedly tolerate rebase, not even using rerere, instead of doing a simple ‘git merge --no-ff’ to one-shot it, not understanding that rebase touches every commit in the diff between main and not simply the latest change on HEAD.

Not a problem if you are a purist on linear history.

I'm quite impressed by how a team managed to wangle the mental model of React and JSX into a terminal interface and in fact I can only imagine that that itself is a product of AI.

That said, the runtime is so resource heavy that, even though the heavy computational workload is given to AI on a remote cluster of servers, it will bring an old-ish laptop to a stall.

I do wonder though...highly interactive TUIs are not novel. I would wager that AI + the attention of frontend devs have created an environment where you can make fancy terminal UIs without concern for how terminals generally work and if Electron is sitting in the background, it proves it.

Maybe you suouldn't be hacking due diligence if your team isn't ready for it

I'll do most of my work in opencode with GPT 5.3/5.4 and just spin up Claude Code for a review/cleanup pass.

Opencode just works faster and I prefer the UX.

If Infinite Jest was real I think this would be it, human and AI alike rendered catatonic by an abyssal rectum

What dependencies, these days, are not downloaded over the net?

If someone put this app on CDs and gave them out at a supermarket, well, it worked for AOL 30 years back but not now.

This guy just discovered static linking.

May he enjoy an eternal debate about static and dynamic linking, strong types and duck types, tabs and spaces, vim and emacs, less and more, and Kickers and Rockport.

Fair play to you on this. You were correctly attacking me on a low effort post and it got turned around onto you.

This is how it works. I can double down on bullshit and you can spin your wheels arguing against it.

That wasn't my original intention, I just wanted to say Thiel and Karp are assholes but you should see for yourself.

This is just being absurd.

If I was to say "Musk is an asshole just look at what he did at the presidential inauguration in 2025" and you said "you'd make a better point by giving a source for that ominous reference", I would think you were acting in bad faith because of how widely reported Musk's nazi salutes were at the time, and I would feel completely fair in saying "go and find out for yourself, you have all of the necessary information to do so."

I would actually think that you were in a position to defend that person but weren't ready to express that yet. So here we are with Thiel and Karp where 5 minutes of using Google or something would bring up various reports of Karp's recent conference statements. And I could have done that myself originally but "source?" is quite an irksome reply to deal with.

This sadly doesn't reflect

The modern LinkedIn style

Of writing about

How Being a Navy Seal helped my B2B Sales

Ruby was forward thinking enough to give libraries bizarre pet names that had no obvious connection to their functionality.

Pundit, Capybara, Bullet, Grape, Faraday...

You know what? It's all on the public record, and if someone wants to defend these guys or challenge my opinion they can do better than asking for sources of well reported behaviour.

Prove me wrong by contributing more than I did.

I don't think you have to understand why they made that decision, you just have to understand who they are and what they believe in. Just have a look at what they talk about, and what they are quoted as saying.

Then it will start to make sense.

Even then, one of the great things with PHP was the shared-nothing architecture. A whole class of bugs simply do not exist when there is no concept of shared memory between requests.

People would be terrified of it now but patching a change by copying a single file over FTP was the norm in the 00s. The change would be picked up on the next request.

Want to roll it back? Just rename `file.php.bak` to `file.php` and you're golden.

Tried that last year and the problem was, the tickets themselves were broken down well enough to make sense to the naked eye. The second problem was that it was all for a legacy codebase where practically everybody who had built it over the years had left, so it was a real don't-know-what-you-don't-know situation.

The second problem was always going to be there, even with human written tickets, but the problem really is that someone who relies on AI gets into the habit of treating the LLM as a more trustworthy colleague than anybody on the team, and mistakes start slipping in.

This is equally problematic for the engineers using AI to implement the features because they are no longer learning the quirks of the codebase and they are very quickly putting a hard ceiling on their career growth by virtue of not working with the team, not communicating that well, and not learning.

I like to buy books and would never buy from Amazon. Haven't for a long time for many reasons.

I find it more enjoyable to browse a local bookshop or charity shop and, if I want to buy something specific online I'll go with bookshop.org.

I would argue that it actually reduced the literacy level required to understand the message by using simpler terms.

> formulate my thoughts like I intend them to be received by the reader

> conveys my thoughts the way I want them to be understood by the reader

there is a way the parent poster constructs their sentences that may sound a little clumsy in a literary sense, but is actually dumbed down

Is this not the difference between using AI as an aid to organise yourself, as opposed to using AI as a total replacement for your thoughts or your writing and therefore removing the personal touch?

The bone of contention is that the signal:noise ratio on GPT's output is super low and there is no way to tell the difference between a thoughtful GPT post and slop, and given how easy it is to post at volume with low-effort AI posts, there is a bias towards caution rather than acceptance.

At best it's a case-by-case affordance to use AI as opposed to a blanket rule.

I don't believe that delegating reading comprehension to an LLM is really any better than delegating writing ability. In fact I'd argue it's worse to have an automation advising on what's worth reading or not.

There are a lot of people who have no time for something like Infinite Jest and even getting through the first few chapters is an effort. But at least they tried. An LLM excluding the possibility of reading this book because it is 1000 pages of postmodern absurdity effectively optimises away the fringes of human creativity and leaves only the average stuff behind.

AI slop detectors already exist and are no better than snake oil, because a person can have an LLM-smelling writing style without actually using AI. After all, LLMs were originally trained on human input.

Is cloudflare becoming a mob outfit? Because they are selling scraping countermeasures but are now selling scraping too.

And they can pull it off because of their reach over the internet with the free DNS.

Is that because you delegate or descope?

Why is an SVP doing this if it's just gonna be ignored?

I'm gonna be a cynic and say this is money following money and Yann LeCun is an excellent salesman.

I 100% guarantee that he will not be holding the bag when this fails. Society will be protecting him.

On that proviso I have zero respect for this guy.

It's a pretty egregious failure for the org because it controlled the conditions for it to happen.

The security guy is just the patsy because he actioned it.

They have obviously done this a million times before and now they got burned.

But if you imported a lifted truck, or another daft US vehicle like the Cybertruck into another country it would probably not be roadworthy and the traffic and speed calming measures are more appropriate.

Bullbars used to be a trend in the UK, for example, until they were band in the late 90s/early 00s because they were fatal to pedestrians.

On the front of it he's not a very good manager for the team then.

Once you get to leadership you're giving credit where it's due and soaking up the loss.

I disagree. There is no code that can't be tested. There is certainly no code that has to be changed so it can be tested.

The only reason you would decide code is untestable without touching it is because it doesn't seem worth the effort, so you test the thing that calls that code instead and mock it out.

At the highest level it is all inputs and outputs after all. Your spaghetti app can still be tested end-to-end, which will cost you the most but will work.

We're talking about SaaS and web apps and shit here of course, because we're on HN where downtime on Cloudflare equals a day off work. In other industries you'd be running full blown simulations and proofs and maybe even inventing new mechanisms of testing so you can get a hard project off the ground. Maybe even fabricating materials.

It's not young people it's inpatient people. My mum was happy to browse the pirate bay and demonoid and all that, where all the adverts were massive throbbing cocks and hardcore porn lining the edges of the page, just so she could torrent the latest hidden object game. She became addicted to those games and it wasn't enough for me to give her credits to buy a few more of them, and because I was her son I was the tech support who had to help her unfuck her laptop after it got loaded up with another round of viruses.

The internet has maliciously complied with most if not all regulation applied to it which is where the new mass of banners and interstitials come from but the ultimate effect is to just beat the user into submission. See the EU cookie mandate and GDPR for how badly that turned out in terms of UX (even though the accountability is well in force under the hood, so the bad UX compliance failed and those sites are just screwing themselves).

In this way, Google was initially a hero but is now just another American Big Tech entity that is too big to fail and can do whatever it wants along with Meta and Amazon, and in fact now TikTok's US entity.

It helps if tests are well written such that they help you with refactoring, rather than just being the implementation (or a tightly coupled equivalent) but with assertions in it.

Rare to see though. I don't think being able to write code automatically means you can write decent tests. Skill needs to be developed.

Introducing Microsoft Commodepilot 365 for Windows Home

It sounds strange to me that you would use GPT to start consulting to your doc, as if you suddenly know better than them. You don't want to be doing their job for them.

If I used GPT for my medical issue last year and everybody took my word for it, I would be dead.