scrollaway

I have zero investments in agentic coding; in fact, my list of investments is pretty public, so I don't really know what point you're trying to make. But creating a new account to try to defend yourself against a threat you claim to be non-existent doesn't scream "I feel secure" to me.

Do y'all have any evidence that github's recent outages are caused by slopcode rather than the significant increase in load, which is exactly what Github & MS have been claiming as the root cause?

I'm tired of these BS stories being pushed by green accounts on HN like there's some damn agenda by someone who thinks their job will be saved "if only the CEOs realized that Slopcode Bad".

You don’t know anything either, you’re just a soup of meat and bones that happens to have emergent properties from chemical reactions.

These framings are not useful.

It’s interesting they would let an alien from outer space run in these elections.

Especially against count binface.

Whatever dude. If you can't see the difference between doing in-thinking freetext arithmetics and counting characters in a word, I have no hope that talking to you will be useful.

Sigh. Read your own link? Yes it’s not the same baseXX encoding with padding as any other.

It makes it not a straight 1:1 map unlike b64, and you need to be doing actual compute in order to get to the result. You are operating on blocks and calculating checks on each, etc. The algorithm isn’t complicated by any means but it’s certainly not the “second most basic translation task”.

And the CryptoNote variant is further different as it operates on 8 byte blocks. So you linked the wrong documentation.

I don't think you understand how this variant of base58 works.

How is this useful or insightful?

You ever go to forums full of entomology specialists and tell them you don’t understand their fancy terms?

It’s baffling how you are trying to wilfully not understand what I’m saying and hiding your head in the sand.

Which barista? The one that uses the machine to do 90% of the work, or the one that isn't a barista and uses the machine to do 100% of the work?

How do you know I don't have said machine at home?

And what bug bit you to make you think this is a good comparison anyway?

Uhuh, but if it was so easy, we also wouldn't be funding billions of euros and dollars in anti-AI-disinformation systems, holding entire conferences about deepfakes and hybrid attacks on civilians, and have dozens of governments opening entirely new defense departments to study and counter the capabilities of AI to disseminate human-like disinformation at scale (which has been affecting elections across the world).

But yeah, your AI slop take about the local burger joint that used free chatgpt to generate a menu filled with typos and bad images is A+.

If you're saying I don't see LLMs for what they are, you are wrong. I have worked in the AI sector for over a decade and I know exactly how the sausage is made. As of today, I run an AI lab (ingram.tech), and we see daily not just the theoretical of what's possible, but how these systems get deployed and who's really at risk. We're head to head with the reality of the terrain.

But it's completely irrelevant. The emergent properties of LLMs, what was built on top of those emergent properties, and the emergent properties of that, are all together building a world nobody is ready for.

If you don't think this, you haven't seen what these things are truly capable of yet. Either that, or you have a romanticized view of what humans actually do in 99% of non-manual jobs.

I'm blown away by how so many people on HN are just... idk, "blind" is the politically correct way to say it, I think. With zero ability to understand the transitive aspects of what they are looking at. For example, these HN threads are so often polluted with comments claiming some random use case cannot possibly be automated.

Sometimes I feel like I'm showing somebody how a spreadsheet can calculate 1+1, and they ask "Yes, but can it do 1+2?".

You have short memory if you think we've not blown past at least 5 different AGI goalposts. They're being moved every time and we're hitting them every time.

Or maybe you just don't know exactly how capable these models are. Most people's experience of AI is a stupid chatbot, it's no wonder they don't understand how these things are coming for their jobs.

On my end, I have a software that is designed and built by Claude, that I did a strategy session on (with claude), and prepared a fundraise for (with claude). My only role, other than "knowing what to aim for", has been to feed the AI some fairly basic english prompts for a few weeks... which is also easily automatable.

Everyone's job is fucked. Devs, CEOs, everyone.

Caring for memory mattered more when memory was sparse.

But then again, it's crazy how people are disingenuous. You're in a thread about Bun being rewritten from a non-memory-safe to a memory-safe language and everyone's shitting on it because it's a useless rewrite. How does this mesh with what you say about caring for stability?

Using AI you can actually start caring about things such as memory, footprint, stability and speed because it's crazy cheap to start optimizing for this, when before you couldn't afford to make the tradeoff.

I have standards.

I have a literal Star Trek conception on my literal Star Trek device. Impossible to even think about how inconceivable this stuff was years ago.

And you’re complaining because they use react.

The epitome of entitlement, first world problems and privilege all together.

Yes I also used Bubbletea. I don’t know about ratatui but honestly I think the hate for react is very blind. It’s not like CC is shipping an embedded web browser. It’s a framework on top of an embedded language that has seen a crazy amount of optimisation.

Disingenuous, much? I've only ever had claude code crash once (after it decided to spawn like 12 subagents and got my laptop swapping like mad).

If you're crashing every 5 minutes, either you have a cursed build, or you need to do a memtest.

It sounds like you completely missed the point I was making: that actually implementing such a highly dynamic TUI application normally requires a significant amount of state tracking and it is significantly easier to write such apps using a functional, descriptive UI framework instead of something like ncurses.

Take it from someone who, in those 24 years, has written UIs in jquery, react and ncurses (and yeah I've tried out Ink and it's great).

"all the downsides that come with that" yeah well, while you're stuck implementing your app in the Best Possible Library, millions of people are happy using claude code and it's crazy useful.

And who put you in charge deciding that improving their zig codebase is the One True Way To Do Things?

Fuck, man, this used to be hacker news, a place where curiosity is rewarded.

Claude Code is able to hyperlink any kind of text, not just the native terminal emulator feature of hyperlinking anything starting with https://...

And your "it's just ANSI escape codes" is the weirdest take on any kind of software.

I have ~24 years of experience coding and the LAST thing I think about when opening claude code is "why is this written in react".

Tell you what I sometimes think about though: The fact it has clickable links and complex formatting rules for markdown, the most interactive and highest-quality clickable interface I've ever seen in a terminal, and somehow manages to work. That actually blows my mind.

THEN, I'm reminded that it's written in React, and I think "Huh, guess that does make it a ton easier than using ncurses or something."

And done.

It was fixed on May 21st, which is 6 days after it was merged to main, and is 6.5 weeks before the release.

Again, you are comparing things which are not comparable.

"Working on a feature" and "Working on a language-to-language port of 1M LOC" are NOT the same thing.

You're also still bringing up "regression per day", while ignoring the fact that without AI, this would have taken easily ~4000 days. Which is 1 regression per 0.003 calendar day. Not the same.

And you still aren't addressing sibling comments reminding you that these aren't shipped migrations. I'll second the comment asking you whether your code is always perfect first-shot, because if we're going to count those bugs, we might be well above your 1/day number.

Migrating a million lines of code is how many human-engineer-years worth of work? Some quick fermi estimates place it at between 15-100 years depending on how much automated tooling is used (without AI).

It really blows my mind how some AI naysayers like you fail the absolute basic common sense test of comparing the comparable. If you, without AI, merged nineteen regressions in 2 weeks, how much work has actually been done? How many features did you rewrite? How many refactors did you make and how difficult were they?

Insane...

Talk to a therapist.

I don't know why you're saying you're "tired of people's hateful bullshit". I originally responded that your point was off, and you're the one writing these comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48886350

Take a breather, my guy. Stop saying in every comment that "you're done" and "this is your last response" and actually go touch a bit of grass. You do not owe anyone on this website a response, and the only thing your comments are for (when they're good and not hostile) is contributing to a discussion. Nobody here cares whether you respond or not.

Anyway, not to detract - this last comment was good. I just think maybe you're putting intent in people's mouths where there is none. For example, I certainly don't believe the bullshit Altman and Amodei are putting out. I just disagree the LLMs don't think.

And yes I also understand the math behind them. But it being math doesn't mean there cannot be emergent behaviour, just like there is emergent behaviour after the layers upon layers of biology in humans, resulting in thinking. "It's not magic, it's just [biology]" applies to us as well.

"But brains are the most complex machines in the universe" some might say -> Right, but who's to say the thinking we do requires machines as complex as our brains are? Our brains move muscles, help us breathe and manage millions of other invisible innate processes, many things LLMs do not need to do. And LLMs have a very, very deep access to and understanding of language, which is argued to be a significant contributor to how humans think (based on studies on nonverbal humans).

> As soon as the math stops being done, the "thinking" stops. Does a brain ever stop thinking?

Right, so I understand your point in this and there's something to that, but it enters in how thinking is defined in both ways.

First, the calculation not running is at best equivalent to time stopping. It's not like the LLM actually sits there waiting for input. As you said: we continuously receive input, and we do so because our biology is built this way and we are damn energy efficient, so we can afford to continuously and asynchronously process that input. But this is not really related to the process of thinking itself.

So it comes down to what happens during the calculation. And Anthropic's published research on the J-space is pretty damning evidence, IMO, that thinking does happen during the calculation.

You phrased it better (and with a lot more patience) than I ever could muster.

So many people I meet are so deeply convinced LLMs absolutely cannot physically think, because they define "thinking" as "that thing you do with your human brain where neurons are involved", and they define "LLM thinking" as "that thing ChatGPT does where it says it's thinking but it's actually just detached inference".

The underlying assumption is usually two-fold:

1. That simulated thinking is not thinking.

2. That "LLM thinking" is always only defined as Chain of Thought.

Well, 1 is a pretty useless stance to have, because it removes space for any useful definition of what thinking is. And 2 is simply false, as presented by Anthropic here: https://www.anthropic.com/research/global-workspace

[flagged]

I hear he got burned pretty badly.