skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Are you using AI Agents or offering AI Agent software?
"AI Agents" is pretty much a generic term. They could be programmatic, they could be purely prompt based, and they could be somewhere on the hybrid range between completely programmatically implemented and purely prompt based. Regardless of the underlying implementation, many AI Agent applications allow end users to edit the AI Agent definitions, and some completely. When these AI Agents are implemented in a pure prompt structure, they become portable to similar AI Agent applications.

Okay, that's the context in which I want to ask:

If you use software that has editable AI Agents, do you feel a personal ownership over them when you've customized one to your personal needs? Such as a legal, copyrightable, this is yours and no one else's ownership over them?

If you are writing and/or publishing/releasing software with editable AI Agents, how are you handling ownership, share ability, clone-ability and potential end user's desire for legal ownership of their customized AI Agents?
The fact that you have to explain this is somewhat concerning.

Usually people say that people skills are as important for having lots of impact as technical skills, but the bar for people skills is really low sometimes I guess.
Its one of the most beautiful books for me...I'm afraid to reread it and lose that feeling.
Hold onto your hats!
If you don't reuse that password anymore, does it matter tho. Some services might use older hashing for older passwords without updating the hash algorithm. But I don't know what is the case here.

brypt passwords are very slow to crack.
Edit: removed repost of article text.

I did not pay attention that this was hosted on substack so I reposted the text here when I got a load time of greater than one minute.
I've poked at web components on and off over the years and never been satisfied with them, but it was only recently that I took the time to put my finger on what exactly my fundamental problem with them was - I never saw any examples where data was being injected in the way you do when working with React/Vue/etc.

https://jsplumbtoolkit.com/blog/2024/07/18/wrapping-data-in-...

Once I introduced a basic mechanism for injecting data it all seemed to be a lot more useful.
Congrats on the launch - definitely interested.

Some minor feedback - I went to the website to look for pricing (scanned the header bar), and couldn't find it.

Didn't think to look in the docs, as it's almost always available from the homepage.

Appreciate you linking it here,but if I hadn't come from HN, I'd assume this is a "contact us for pricing" situation, which is a bit of a turnoff.
I had a situation where I needed to speak to Police some time ago. An sms about the weather was sent, which allowed me to speak to someone, and then after the call, it took me to bbc weather. It was brilliant and I really commend it.
Bandwidth is the numbers of traffic lanes. Latency (speed) is the determined by the material and it's quality of the lanes (gravel road vs asphalt etc.). Throughput is determined by the number of lanes and the speed that vehicles can travel.
Conceptually, they aren't that different. The details do matter though.

WASM on its own isn't anything special security-wise. You could modify Java to be as secure or actually more secure just by stripping out features, as the JVM is blocking some kinds of 'internal' security attacks that WASM only has mitigations for. There have been many sandbox escapes for WASM and will be more, for example this very trivial sandbox escape in Chrome:

https://microsoftedge.github.io/edgevr/posts/Escaping-the-sa...

... is somewhat reminiscent of sandbox escapes that were seen in Java and Flash.

But! There are some differences:

1. WASM / JS are minimalist and features get added slowly, only after the browser makers have done a lot of effort on sandboxing. The old assumption that operating system code was secure is mostly no longer held whereas in the Flash/applets/pre-Chrome era, it was. Stuff like the Speech XML exploit is fairly rare, whereas for other attempts they added a lot of features very fast and so there was more surface area for attacks.

2. There is the outer kernel sandbox if the inner sandbox fails. Java/Flash didn't have this option because Windows 9x didn't support kernel sandboxing, even Win2K/XP barely supported it.

3. WASM / JS doesn't assume any kind of code signing, it's pure sandbox all the way.
Citation needed.

I worked on protein structure prediction for a couple years and it was sota.
I've also been thinking in a kitchen analogy to get management onboard to freeing up the tools used by engineers. There is a push to unify and breakdown silos, which is great, but in the eyes of management it also means using the same IDEs, the same OS, the same AIs etc.

My kitchen analogy is that the tools the engineers use are like the chefs kitchen knives, as long as the dish (code quality) is the same, engineers should be supported in choosing the tools that serve them best and the end results presented goes through a final pass (code review).

Back to the article, I disagree engineers should make the menu, it's not there job to know what the customer wants or to set prices. The engineers cook, the menu would be the maitre'd with the restaurant owner that decides (Yes, in a restaurant the head chef makes the menu and here the analogy breaks down.)
https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Cocaine

Does the molecule C17H21NO4 exist in both the raw, dried leaves of the coca plant, and a powdered, refined extract from the same plant?
Well again, this is the problem with how far you’ve stretched the carpentry comparison. You said it was disingenuous for the CAD user to call themselves a carpenter… and as far as I understand, the CAD user is your equivalent of a game dev who only uses engines.

If your argument is just that sometimes game devs can also make the engine at the same time as making the game, then yeah I agree with that… but I think your earlier posts were saying a lot more than that (such as implying that engine users aren’t really game developers and are basically equivalent to AI art prompters).

Also it’s a little funny you bring up the example of an XNA/FNA game, because that’s already a relatively high level framework, the kind of code those devs would use is really quite similar to using an engine, especially another C# engine like Unity.
We would gain a lot from an independent Chrome and app store that needs and respect devs.
The difficulty is configurable.
You can play around with it at https://bcrypt-generator.com/

I found this, not sure if it's still up-to-date:

◉ PHP's default implementation of bcrypt uses 10 rounds.

◉ Python's bcrypt library uses 12 rounds by default.

◉ Node.js's bcrypt library uses 10 rounds by default.

See also: https://gist.github.com/Chick3nman/32e662a5bb63bc4f51b847bb4...
That only works if you sit in isolation on a mountain and start with no_std and write everything else from scratch, yourself.

The majority exist in a community and have to collaborate with others. They have to deal with the code written by others, code which may use any language feature.

Every developer doing serious work will trip over every available language feature eventually.
Discovering Backdoor in Chinese Router Firmware Update Server – Totolink [video]
> I think you are drastically overestimating the revenue gain from ad blockers

I think you are underestimating it. There must be a reason why google is trying to work around ad blockers on their platforms.

> But I highly doubt they make any back given > 1k people work on it

Where did you find that number? I highly doubt it. Maybe if you are counting contributors to chromium.
> a world where a random click from HN or reddit can't quietly compromise your entire computer

Doesn't Flatpak also solve this?
In a way, but I have a feeling the conquest of work-life by people who don’t understand the directly-productive work the company does is a result of economics operating in the 1980s—present era of unshackled M&A. It’s a regulatory outcome.
Lets attack one of the bastions of information freedom...in the name of Palestine, sigh. Ass-hat hackers.
> you could replace every instance of "ball" in this article with "sphere" and it would still be correct.

I completely agree. N-ball is maybe more mathematically precise. It might rule out some strange edge case I couldn't think of. I chose it mostly for stylistic reasons. n-ball is shorter than n-sphere, and ball is a more playful term.

I do however understand the need to define the two object classes, and see little issue with giving them distinct names.
Random tangent: now I’m curious if there are any languages where the word for alcohol and vodka (or whatever is locally the most common spirit) is the same. Seems plausible that there would be.
"All Ukrainians live in Canada! — The people"

"If the dick is too short, it's Putin's fault — The people"

This is actually hilarious, thanks for sharing. By the way you seem to forget that Ukrainians have several ethnic slurs for Russians, like Katsap and Moskal.

I suggest you add this to your reading list: https://neolurk.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B0%D0%BF%D1%8...
Having watched nearly all my work ever basically be thrown away, usually way before it actually provides enough benefits to have been worth the cost, and for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the work: yeah, I definitely don’t care enough about anything I make at work to stick my neck out quite that far. There’s professional, then there’s unhealthy.
I suggest you read this as well: https://neolurk.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B0%D0%BF%D1%8...
It still seems like it could be correlated, but it shouldn't be used as a diagnostic measure or taken as a sign of something. It's more likely to be a sign of abusive parenting, but abusive parenting is also correlated with the psychopath behavior so it all ends up being correlated with each other.
Using an apostrophe to mark a plural is often called a grocer’s apostrophe - https://www.grammar-monster.com/punctuation/using_apostrophe...

In English I’m actually ok with it for single letters or abbreviations- “your writing uses a lot of x’s and y’s”, “Can you pack away the CD’s and DVD’s”, but this is a personal quirk and definitely non-standard usage.
Can I ask a stupid question about shaped charges? I assume they only work on a very fast projectile, like a tank shell. Would they work from a (relatively) slow drone?
I feel like I need to be a bit more frank

> WASM is just a bytecode (similar to JVM or .NET bytecode but even higher level ...

Yes, and I think this was a poor engineering choice on behalf of WASM engineering team, instead of using something much closer to actual assembly. And we are grappling with long startup times and lots of compiler infra pushed into the client because of that.

> ...not your own WASM blob, but you can build a new WASM blob and run that.

another baffling limitation, considering you can modify your C#, Java or even native code at runtime.

Unless they are working around some constraint unknown to me, in which case I'd love to know about what it is, they made bad technical decisions in the design.
Interesting article. I wonder if in part 2 they will cover the work done at TRW as part of the VHSIC Phase 2 program. They succeeded with a WSI chip called the CPUAX that used some of the same redundancy techniques together with a built in self test and configuration system.
Please don't confuse anarchy with chaos.
Not everyone subscribes to the believe of needing to sacrifice their own lifetime, when they have have no interest in having children. It is fine, if you personally do. Just stop trying to push that as the single truth onto other people. What is stopping you from simply keeping your opinions addressing yourself, instead of trying to make them into over-generalized views to be pushed onto others? You could say: "For me it was the right decision to do X." and it would be fine. Accept, that others are different.
I still think using the exception mechanism for things that could just be conditionals is bad. I elaborated on this to a sibling comment.
Installing Mastodon Inside a FreeBSD Jail: A Comprehensive Guide – IT Notes
Is Internet Archive teh same as Archive.is?
The whole lecture series was about giving students a style of thinking that might hopefully prepare them for the future, without focusing on special knowledge (there were other courses for that).

Two of the lectures were spent on building intuition for very high dimensionality (this one), and another on neural networks, because he thought there was a big chance they were going to be important. In the early 90s, not bad.
For me Cursor and v0 can and will coexist. Cursor is helpful working at smaller pieces of code in a flow you are orchestrating actively, v0 and bolt are MVP/PoC makers that can't really help much if the project grows. I do think something similar to the mythical AI SWE will happen this decade and that may eat the market, but I don't think it will emerge from these tools.

I have been working on generative AI for coding for some time (building producta.ai now), and based on user research and beta testing, people prefer tools that are good at working on existing repositories and at handling complete features, even if later they need to review / update parts of the solutions. If one specific tool ends up eating the rest, it's probably going to start like something on these lines
Bad internet habit, just asssume that "you" refers to the hypothetical person made of nothing but that one expressed opinion
The Race to Negative Latency
they work but if something else is better.
This is a complete straw man. It is completely normal for developers to ask all of the listed 'banned' questions to the product owner.
I read the article and the threads (to a point). It's hilarious that in the article you describe LLMs as being like hasty people jumping to conclusions, and the commenters on HN do exactly that thing in their comments.
OpenAI's financial projections suggest it won't reach a profit until 2029
I disagree with this premise entirely.

A product owner is the conductor of the symphony.

Unless you have a team of experienced senior engineers, the engineers will lack the perspective and wisdom to make the proper choices.
are you trying to suggest that Darwinian selection is the most efficient way to organize a collective to achieve a goal?
I think "routinely" is overstating it, billions people are running arbitrary JS on a daily basis and no meaningful number of them are being infected by malware.

Browser surface attracts the most intense security researcher scrutiny so they do find really wild chains of like 5 exploits that could possibly zero day, but it more reflects just how much scrutiny it has for hardening, realistically anything else will be more exploitable than that, eg your Chromecast playing arbitrarily video streams must he more exploitable than JS on a fully patched Chrome.
Bizarre that they don't have basic sanity checks on the data they're about to display to millions of people.
Plop is an excellent software but I'm not sure it's still that useful. I remember using it to boot to usb sticks on bios that did not support it years ago. That was really cool
Big thread about two months ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41303974
I'm struggling with this a bit. At a certain point it feels you get pushed in this direction. So many other non-engineers have ideas/promises... and being the one who provides the eggs, incentives are not great.
We have a lot more compartmentalized connections today than in the past. It's not surprising that those people will not "have time" for your grief. But in the past people had most of their lives connected to a fewer number of people. In that context it is more natural to take time for those people. In a smaller world your work friends know your dad so they can share your grief.
I can only talk about Ford and Italy.
Here the owner of the vehicle must give explicit consent to collect and share data with third party. Ford italian branch is very strict about this, first hand experience. I know other european car makers processes are similar, but I have no first hand experience with them.
The whole series is on Youtube, awesome.

The course was also the basis for his book _The Art of Doing Science and Engineering_ (1997). At first it takes some getting used to as you have the feeling it may be outdated, but it's about teaching a style of thinking. It's great.
Bags of dry beans are a lot cheaper than cans. there should be room for a few vegitables in the budget.
> From the economics perspective, something being Monopoly doesn't mean it's inefficient.

From an economics perspective, if there is a monopoly, there is no free market, so you can't rely on the market for efficiency. A monopoly can be efficient, but it can also be arbitrarily inefficient and still keep its position.
> The reality is that most developers have subconsciously internalized the compiler behavior and assume that will always hold.

I blame this on how people like to teach C and present C.

It's very important that the second anyone conceives of the idea of learning C that they first off informed that trying things and seeing what happens is a highly unreliable method of learning how C programs behave and that C is not a high level assembly language.

If you teach C in relation to the abstract machine instead of any real world machine you will understandably scare off most people. Which is good, since most people shouldn't be learning or writing C. It's a language which can barely be written correctly even by people with the necessary self discipline to only write code they're 100% certain is well defined.

> It is difficult to determine if I’ve been successful in this endeavor.

Why is your program so full of casts between pointer types that you have difficulty determining if you've avoided strict aliasing?

Yes, if you treat C as a high level assembly language (like the linux kernel likes to do) then it becomes difficult to reason about the behaviour of your programs where 50% of them are in the grey area of uncertainty of whether they're well defined or not.

If you are forced to write C in a non-learning context, don't write any line of code unless you're certain you could tell someone which parts of the standard describe its behaviour.

> Here is why I don’t blame the developers: writing fast, efficient systems code that satisfies the requirements of strict aliasing as defined by C/C++ is surprisingly difficult.

C/C++ isn't a language. So I will stick to C because I don't know nor care about C++.

That being said, it's not hard to write efficient C which satisfies the requirements of strict aliasing except when you're dealing with idiotic APIs like bind or connect. Most code by default, assuming you use appropriate algorithms and data structures, is performant. The only time it becomes difficult with regards to strict aliasing is if you're micro optimizing.

While non-trivial, the case of converting between unsigned long and float shown in the article is entirely possible to do with completely safe C constructs. Likewise serialization/deserialization of binary data never requires coming close to aliasing unless you're dealing with a "native" endian protocol. In the case of general serialisation and deserialisation, compilers will reliably optimise such operations into one or two instructions (depending on whether you're decoding same-endianness or not).
"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway."

-- Andrew S. Tanenbaum
"correctness-oriented C" definitionally cannot consider "[relying] on those casts".
No. It’s not clear who runs Archive.is (there are domains registered by a ‘Denis Petrov’ with an address in Prague), but the Internet Archive (archive.org) is run by a non-profit foundation.
I think Matt is very clearly in the wrong here. He's trying to impose additional restrictions on GPL-licensed software. His incorrect perspective is of little value to me.

> Matt seems convinced (for better or worse) that WP Engine tried to mislead Wordpress users, and tried to damage Wordpress in other ways.

He's not.

> The analogy I made is they got Al Capone for taxes,” Mullenweg says. [...] Mullenweg argues one of the reasons for its success is the use of “WordPress” across its site. “That’s why we’re using that legal avenue to really, yeah, pressure them. That’s true: we are pressuring them.”

He wants WP Engine to pay/contribute (while requiring audits to ensure they're properly contributing), and is just using trademark claims as the instrument to force them to pay up.

https://www.theverge.com/2024/10/4/24262232/matt-mullenweg-w...
Often there is not so much work for PO as many projects are not dealing with something new but a slight variation of existing functionality. In contrast to this just reinventing the wheel on a newer stack requires many architectural, tactical and technical decisions. The role of the architect has been relegated to ‚the team‘ and is parceled into user stories chopped into sprints. Without balancing mechanisms for product and technical leadership we will continue to produce random quality under consistent high pain.
Thank you so much!

1. Where exactly did you see this? There are internal FinetuneDB API keys, and external API keys like OpenAI. Though it's confusing, I agree!

2. Work in progress.

3. I agree, thanks for the feedback.

There are multiple components working together, so it's hard to define a single tech stack. When it comes to the web app, Remix is my framework of choice and can highly recommend it.
Browsers are using new http features much earlier than they're available in the system libraries. Browsers supported http2 and 3 before they were standardised enough to include in systems. .net http client still can't even tell you about http2 early hints as far as I understand it.

It's going to be the same for crypto and compression. Systems don't ship with brotli for example. The battle tested implementations come to the browsers first in many cases - or at least they're battle tested at the point anyone starts including them in .net or Java.
If the drug is needed by 1 million people, selling it for $1 will net you $1 million (let's assume all the 1 million can afford $1). If they instead sell it for $1000 and only 2000 people who need it can afford it, they'll make $2 million, so it's much more economically efficient.
Sorry, might have mixed up Yup and Joi.
Anyways, I prefer Zod to both of them.
What an absurd premise. It's too valuable to allow it to disappear. Revenues of $30m/year in a territory with a GDP of ~$70m/year means there is more than enough skin in it to suggest that this moves from a ccTLD as it was to a gTLD, if IANA really care about the difference. It's another Tuvalu (.tv) story in the making, nobody in Mauritius, the UK or the islands themselves is going to just let this disappear.
The mental exercise is to compare two identical Jeff Bezos' (identify his attributes), one has the background/funds they did, one doesn't.

Of course, that's not possible, so then you do the same with other highly intelligent and skilled tech professionals. I'd argue that without the funding and other resources, those skilled pro's won't get anywhere. But with it, some would do incredibly well. It's not common in a global sense, but we see it every single day.

Comparing Bezos to thousands/millions of randomised others is pointless.

Then you may say, oh but Amazon is unique. Yes, but then there are other factors at play. Like the luck (skill? funding?) to take advantage of a unique moment in time at the start of the web. That moment isn't available eveI mean, try to start an Amazon today ... etc
Tolerance for ideas one disagrees with has a very short history in space and time. Intolerance in this area seems to be the long run equilibrium and we are simply returning from a far from equilibrium state that could only last so long.