smashed

They will do these prompt just fine but the result will be a near identical copy of an open source version. And it won't tell you it cloned some existing engine, because it does not know, it just pulled it out from its model. Now you have an AI slopped 3d engine or DBMS no-one cares about that will just rot.

This is certainly true but I am also seeing some contrarian signals: people shaming you for doing stuff AI is faster at or having absolutely no shame or being proud of using AI for their work... To the point of not realizing how useless that actually makes them. And they get promoted.

Agreed. I carefully choose the software I use because I believe the author poured in some domain specific knowledge and made a tool that is novel and carefully thought through.

That does not mean a clever user cannot use an AI tool to help produce it, but so far most of it is slop. Some clever users can build some gems though.

It never does because however you frame it, AI is always the perfect scapegoat.

"Oh, I'm sorry, the bug was introduced by the AI and it made such a good case for it. Damn you claude, we'll do better next time. I'll add a code-review agent to find regressions."

Yup.

And it's also the kind of solution a misaligned agent would implement:

Make sure users are happy about their experience but also optimize resources.

The obvious solution is to route users based on feedback.

Yup. I remember my dismay when I started working with Linux on arm boards and realizing the absolute massive gap between the hardware vendor claims of "full linux support" and the reality.

Sometimes the SDK is a zip of the developer workspace in a pseudo working state with no clear records of all that's been patched.

Vendors providing binary only kernel and system images containing god knows what is not uncommon either.

I'm convinced now that arm hardware vendors are simply incapable of even understanding what proper software support is. I'm sure some of their devs do their best but management does not care. By the time the chip ships, efforts move to making the next thing so they never properly finish the software side.

Agreed. I was not following the thought process, it read like an LLM agreeing with the author, not like a logical argument being developed.

Well of course the ads work, that is not quite the point. If social media ads did not work, meta would not be worth over a trillion dollars.

The point is do users want ads? Or more reasonably, should platforms offer a paid, ad-free, experience.

recurring issue with quay.io and fixes get longer and longer every time.

Second paragraph starts with

> No, it’s not about the [...]

Am I the only one who can no longer read past something like that? Article may or may not be AI generated, but on first glance I get a bad vibe and I loose all interest.

Apple silicon is winning in performance and power consumption. It's not quite the same as the old Intel based generation, where they were more like premium/well built machines with good screens and hardware.

Now some people would like to use that top of the line Apple silicon but without MacOS that comes with it. I doubt this is a huge threat to apple but it's also not a huge market for them. From what I understand they are not actively impeding it but not actively helping it either.

I actually won a M2 laptop a while ago. I resold it, new in box still shrink wrapped because I did not care for MacOS, just a personal preference. People like me are a minority though.

What is the purpose here? You are still stuck with a full blown MacOS running the system no? That is what Asahi tries to replace, not the other way around.

I must have missed something but can't you just prompt it to answer in your desired style? What am I missing here.

Commenting because I am struggling with this too, claude code seems to be so verbose no matter how I prompt it.

This. I was looking for a quick Dart board score tracker app to keep scores for family games.

The play store results were ATROCIOUS and user hostile, forcing account creation, full screen video ads and other BS.

I remembered I had f-droid and I found a perfect, no bullshit app that does exactly what I needed and no ads.

When testing Claude code in auto mode in a fresh sandbox with a docusaurus website freshly cloned, I asked:

Can you see the docs folder with the git project?

It was in auto mode. So it immediately saw a docusaurus site (good) but instead of stopping there, it installed nodejs from a static binary download (no root access so only way), ran npm install, started the dev server and confirmed the project worked.

That is some crazy amount of leeway for an intent based classifier. I'm not surprised it's full of holes, and it seems to be 100% by-design.

Fair. I can be overly precise in my communication style, let me know if you'd prefer a more delicate or load bearing tone. Just say the words.

Debian is notoriously very strict on accepting maintainers and they are not anonymous.

tl;dr: stripe sees tokens as the next currency and chose to buy their way in.

It's possible using overlay networks but other than that there has been no progress on that front. The routing table updates would overwhelm the system. Ipv6 does nothing to address device roaming. There is multipath TCP but I have never encountered anything using it.

Most improvements on that front has been happening on the application layer, where the app attempts to retain functionality even though the underlying network conditions are changing, to various degrees of success (mostly not that great).

Wait till you see the number of actual chip vendors.

There is about 3.. Broadcom, Qualcomm and MediaTek. Together they control I believe 100% of wifi chips used in routers and APs. Often it's sold as a package / system on chip so it's also the main cpu.

On the client side there is a little bit more competition but not much.

I'd say mostly sys admins type users that want to stay on top of things?

I install Linux on a wide variety of hardware for both work and personal reasons.

I don't read the detailed changelogs religiously but after years of paying some attention to them I can understand most of it and see where the industry is investing developer efforts, what cool new hardware is gaining support and what new security or performance features people are focusing on.

I think that's the part the article glosses over, probably because it's such an evidence to the author.

The only way this works is to use the same exact model and weights right? So that you can replay the text generation as it would have been originally done, and compare output?

And then what, if there is no match do you need to retry with all other known models that could have been used?

Or are models sufficiently similar that they are interchangeable for this type of watermark?

And what if a competing or open source model was used? I can't see how the watermark would work.

And if you have access to a non-watermarked output? How can you prove they are not simply using another key? How can you be sure the text is not watermarked? From the explanations, you can't.

I was referring to what I observe working with various teams and open source projects using AI, not necessarily best practices or what a curated workflow can produce.

Even before LLMs, most teams don't bother cleaning up. The best you'll see is feature branch getting squashed on merge.

AI is not really a factor here. Teams/orgs that did not care before still won't, only 10x more.

That was hard to understand. So the idea if I'm not mistaken is to iterate without constraint/move fast and break things (build wide).

Demo the work, keep changing. Don't worry about the amount of changes, don't worry about nice commits. You are free to explore and produce as much changes as required.

Then use AI agents to clean up the history and produce a nice change set that you can ship in a more traditional way, small clean commits.

That is an interesting idea I guess. AI agents can be used to clean up git histories, not only produce large amounts of code.

Somehow, I think heavy LLM users don't really care about a clean git history / changesets? May be if the project or existing workflow you are bound to requires it you will do the extra steps but really I don't see it being done much.

Are you really going to review these small changes? So far the example I saw from agents are terrible. Full of drive-by, unrelated changes here and there. Mostly harmless or OK changes, but not focused.

That's not really HN's fault but all modern browsers will warn the user before accessing an http site with a security warning.

My point was not to use http only as a finished solution, but to let the admin front the http-only service with their TLS termination solution of choice.

Ok I'll bite again.

Do you want a caddy service embedded with every web app you self host or are you running a single one serving all your apps?

From my understanding if you want acme http challenges to just work with let's encrypt you probably need to use a single, separated caddy to front all your apps.

In that case if I ship a caddy service pre configured to do TLS termination with my app it's just more trouble for you no?

That is exactly what I am talking about.

You say caddy. The next person will say nginx-proxy-manager. The next will say DNS challenge let's encrypt behind wireguard VPN. The next will say Traefik. The next will say CloudFlare tunnels.

Everyone has their preferred solution and its always the best and simplest.

I can relate to the TLS termination issue. It is difficult to provide a self hosted version of a web app with a sensible TLS setup.

The best is almost not to do it at all. Just have a docker image serve http/1.1 and document that a reverse proxy is required to expose the service.

There are simply too many ways to do it and every sys admin/hobbyist has their own preferred way.

For the anonymous and authenticated caching issues the author goes into, I think once again it is useless for self hosting. Just embed a performant web server like nginx for example that is pre configured to serve static files. Use proper headers, and predictable/simple paths. Self-hosted versions are going to be low traffic and just need to work.

Have advanced settings for more control, but keep the default simple and working out of the box with minimal dependencies.

Afaik it has always been that way. I remember 20 years ago as I was dabbling with various bsds, OpenBSD was known for security, FreeBSD for features and netbsd for small, ultra portable kernel.

Lack of competition is the reason. Not the size of the country. Especially in a suburb.