1,150 karma · joined October 29, 2025
By witnessing first-hand the abuse and blowing the whistle on Zuckerberg for trying to manipulate elections.
The Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal broke because an employee leaked proof, and now Facebook has to cough up 25 billion in fines. Do you think Zuckerberg didn't felt this?
What a stupid appeal to morality. This is not the middle ages where you can only aspire to do the right thing if you abdicate any worldly possession. I am paid well because I stood up for myself in contract negotiations, and no keyboard hero is going to put my sense of right and wrong into question because I earn more than you.
If you care about preventing Meta from doing evil things, you have far more influence and power over that if you work for Meta.
Yes, that sounds awfully suspicious and counterproductive. It sounds like they actually want to silence any reference to wrongdoing, as if potential whistleblowers and offenders must be held accountable to deeply contrasting morality bars.
To me, asking people who object to their employer's moral, ethical, and/or criminal violations to resign and go away has the same vibes as calling for people who criticism the government to exile: their goal is not to fix things, is to silence dissent.
I recall that when this benchmark came out there were concerns that AI companies were gaming benchmarks to fake their progress. The purpose was to find something silly and outlandish that AI companies would definitely not have trained their models on, and thus have a way to check a model's capabilities.
A pelican riding a bicycle is pretty random. That was the whole point.
What do you have to say about this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022%E2%80%932023_Brazilian_co...
What are smoking? If you bother to check, United24 clearly describes itself as "The official fundraising platform for collecting donations to support Ukraine."
I'm not sure you understood the point, which is that relative trends are irrelevant.
If there's a single member who outgrows everyone and increases its share of the global market, of course all other members will see their relative share shrink.
That's fun, here's the US's version of that graph.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/270267/united-states-sha...
Notice that both show the same downward trend?
Do you know what's behind that trend? It's because it's a graph of the global share. The share drops if the GDP of other members is increasing faster. Someone like, say, China.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/270439/chinas-share-of-g...
China is doing brilliantly since the 80s, to the point it overthrew the US as the global hegemon. India is also doing well, albeit in a far less impressive way
https://www.statista.com/statistics/271328/indias-share-of-g...
Not really. It's pointless to go around accusing everyone of picking what they believe to be subpar alternatives when they even fail to establish what the par actually is, let alone what would be a preferred option.
It's as if they post this blend of comments just to try to feel smug.
> There are a bunch of well known alternatives:
See, that's what makes these exercises pointless. Those might work for your weekend pet projects, where you have the luxury of wasting all Sundays toying with how to deploy CICD systems because you have nothing better to do. For actual work, not so much. For example, SourceHut is renowned for being in perpetual alpha. It's baffling how it's being floated as a reasonable alternative to either GitLab or GitHub. Here's what they have to say about the risk of choosing them at this stage:
It's so trivial to put together any CICD pipeline that it barely registers as a skill you need to develop. All jobs run on containers you control, you specify the scripts you want to run in each job (e.g., npm test), and done. For standard pipelines you don't even bother to set precedence and fan-out/fan-in because if you set your stages as the default stages then that's already done for you.
Also nice, GitLab provides terraform providers for it's CICD infrastructure.
GitHub Actions in comparison is a god-awful mess that has only parallel in Azure YAML Pipelines, another abomination that should be used as a punishment instead of a production system.
I'm baffled by remarks of GitLab's ICD being "unintuitive". I mean, GitLab's pipelines are made up of a set of stages, and stages are made up of a set of jobs. To put it differently, GitLab's pipelines are made up of jobs, which are grouped into stages. Does this go against your personal notion of a pipeline?
> The smallest unit of action on GitLab is a whole job
No. A job is the smallest unit of execution you can assign a runner to execute. It is used to set things like dependencies and runtime environments. Once your job sets the environment, your job can start to execute your scripts. This means a set of individual shell commands or shell scripts you provide.
> You cannot share secrets between jobs.
Yes, and only a very silly and clueless person would ever think it would be a good idea to share secrets through random runners due to exfiltration risks.
This is not a GitLab thing, mind you. You should really read this
https://secure-pipelines.com/ci-cd-security/gitlab-ci-cd-sec...
> Multiple workflow files instead of a single `.gitlab.yml`
Now I wonder if you're just trolling.
> Dynamic services,
Now this is just silly. Did you even bothered to learn how GitLab handles this?
You broadcasted your negative feedback but it seems you had no positive remarks to give. If you feel everything is so bad, would you mind sharing what tolerable alternatives are there to GitHub and GitLab?
That's fine. GitLab offers self-hosted solutions where companies run the service in their own infrastructure and limit who has access to it. The same cannot be said by GitHub, though.
You must be trolling. Even US cloud providers have multiple regions in Europe, and the likes of Eutelsat precede SpaceX for a couple of decades and have been around for half a century already.
> Europe can claim to be cleaner or more democratic, but it doesn't change that they get nothing done.
I don't think you're noticing the US is plunging into self-imposed irrelevance. It can't even manage to properly fight a war anymore,as can be attested by the whole Iran fiasco. But keep parroting your alt right pipeline tropes pushed by Russian bots. Don't forget to complain how Europe is freezing and how minority rights are a societal problem.
It seems you've been living under a rock. Europe is already started investing those billions on non-US providers, and the US is already complaining it's not fair.
https://www.euronews.com/2026/09/30/us-ambassador-slams-eus-...
> They are politically and societally paralyzed from building even basic things like (...)
You're spending too much time in your alt-right pipeline. Europe already mobilized to cover around 80% of Ukraine's external aid, and is providing Ukraine with long range missiles and even drone technology, which the US conspicuously lacks.
Even this week there were news reports that Ukraine was now looking at Eutelsat to replace StarLink.
Trump,remaining true to his Russian asset fame, has been undermining the US in multiple fronts including diplomacy and defence treaties, and is literally pressuring Ukraine to capitulate to Russia. The sole reason why this plan hasn't succeeded is the fact that, unlike your claim, Europe stepped up and silently filled the role and responsibilities that the US held previously in NATO and Europe's security infrastructure. Therefore, Trump's threats to withhold support now lack any weight, rendering these threats completely ineffective. Thanks to Europe.
Europe's work was so successful to the point where Trump himself is throwing desperate lifelines at Putin's regime with actions such as lifting self-imposed blockaded to buy diesel straight from Putin, and demanding Zelensky resigned for Ukraine's success in attacking Russia's critical infrastructure. That tells you all there is to know on how far Europe stepped up.
All companies are doing all kinds of desperate things to build up their massive training corpus. Perhaps everyone already forgot all the news on the massive copyright violation campaign that US companies have been continuously committing in the name of training models?
> US models are more advanced than Chinese models and don't.
That's only your wishful thinking. As Kimi K3.1 Pro shows, even their open weights models are beating frontier models from US companies. Even if you want to dismiss them for allegedly distilling other models,you would need to explain why they are still beating the distilled model?
You can see in this discussions the goalposts being actively moved to desperately create a notion that the lead is still there.
You even see people in this thread referring to imaginary wonder models that they expect US companies to have under development that are supposedly leaps and bounds more impressive, albeit the only reference there is to their existence is the commenters hopes and dreams.
I think people need to realize that there is no longer a cutting edge company that is expected to dominate, and among the multitude of AI companies in the field competition is so tight that no one would even be surprised if tomorrow some other company far away from the US was able to crank out the top performing model, or something like a small local model that outperforms mid/high tier frontier models. The local model alone would be a death sentence to US companies, who are still burning through 10x their revenue.
It's fine if you don't trust them. You are free to put together your own benchmarks, run your own tests across models, and objectively compare results.
That's how you gathered your data to support your claim other benchmarks are totally inaccurate, right? Right?
I don't think you understand. Benchmarks show just that, that they "are crushing the competition".
I mean, remember Fable? A couple of months back it was lauded as leaps and bounds above everything, that needed to be contained at all costs? Well, apparently Kimi K3.1 Pro outperforms it.
What industrial level of cope do you need to drag in order to look at the results and claim they need to make excuses about anything at all?
The Trump administration has all the hallmarks of Russian assets, and Elon "please invite me to your wildest parties mr Epstein" Musk is no different. Once you start to look at those bunch through that perspective, their once incomprehensible and self defeating stunts start to make sense.
Hillary Clinton warned all you guys that Trump was a Russian asset and you learned nothing.
That just conveys an idea of being extremely desperate for being the leaders when you're clearly not it, and that despair is so great that you don't mind switching teams midway through just to be able to claim you're winning.
The benchmarks show Kimi K3.1 Pro outrunning practically all models. It's weird to hear someone like you accusing them of making up excuses for not lagging behind in discussions on how they are ahead of the pack.
I think you're confusing things. The "small change" refers to the diff size. It's far easier to review a one-liner because the impact analysis is limited to that local change.
Of course if your change is something like "mutex.lock()" or "rm -rf *" then these changes will be more consequential than 500 files worth of whitespace changes.
If you bother to read the blog post, the other conditions in the "AND" are who posted the developer and which project the PR is updating.
This does not make it better. It's a YOLO bro allowlist.
To make matters worse, they effectively implemented a YOLO allowlist to allow a specific developer to batch 1k loc changes to the set of services they are working on without requiring any scrutiny.
Crazy stuff.
They could achieve this in a much simpler way by just removing PR requirements from those users in those projects.
But this has "agents".
Software engineers are not required to copy files around. They are hired to figure out what is the best way to deliver the features envisioned by product managers, and how to keep things working.
> So the margins get tighter and tighter and companies with "finished software" will have less and less money to be collected.
There is no such thing as finished software. At best you decide to stop maintaining it.