anthonyskipper

If you ever ran an actual freenet node and you looked at the content that flowed through it you realize that solution doesn't make the world better, and all your flowerly arguments are bs. Censorship resistance isn't a good goal... many countries have strong free speach laws, but even they put limits on it for good reasons. This is one of those reasons, and building a tool to deny justice (called censorship resistance) where it should be done is not a good thing.

The right thing to do here is probably not to encourage the developers to find something better to work on, but instead get the FBI to realize if they just got a warrant for every freenet node and they siezed that machine it would have child porn in the cache or local storage and you could arrest and prosecute a bunch of people for child porn who deserve it just for running a node even if they didn't make it or look for it.

There is no way this project does more good than bad. It's a pedo platform.

It's awful to see people still using this. Freenet was a terrible mistake, it achieved none of its goals, but it ended up being an amazing tool for pedos and child porn.

If any of the devs read this please find a better project to contribute to.

But what you say is not entirely true. There is much to love about companies burning cash on R&D. That's how a lot of greatness happened.

But what is wrong in the meta situation is that while Meta officially projects its 2026 AI capital expenditures to be between $130 billion and $145 billion, investigative reports indicate its true future liabilities exceed $690 billion once unlisted back-end deals and lease commitments are factored in. They have used shadow accounting in many places to hide these things. As it's a publicly traded company so if that goes south it hits a lot of 401ks. So that in a nutshell is why its kinda a bad thing. But you are still kinda right in that its not an existential threat and it's not going to wipe Meta out even though those numbers could totally destroy the vast majority of public companies.

I have bad news for you. No matter what you do here it is probably not sustainable. Competing commercially with people who have so much more resources and ability to build is not sustainable. If it's open source you need adoption, and shouldn't care if people want to steal and remix your work as that will drive more adoption.

But from a fellow engineer's perspective we don't need another commercial solution in this space. Every major tech vendor is working on harnesses, and we will get ones that will run circles around yours for free. The open source ones that get popular will have mit/freebsd/etc permissive licenses. (or no one will adopt them) But coming at it from the angle you are indicates you haven't reasoned well about this. Please don't hurt yourself and those around you by starting a startup on this idea.

The scariest part of the interaction is the first video at https://x.ai/bot where the bot just snags your creds from the browser and takes over. So many people are going to give x all their data and creds.

Parallax error decreases significantly when lens are close enough and these are mm apart. They are close enough that you can probably just play a perspective trick and hide any artifacts.

There is plenty of room for open source models that "require" a subscription to be used or obtain working updated binaries. Same as any open source platform.

I'd be happy to pay a small monthly fee to license the model to run locally. I'm already paying for Claude, GPT, Gemini,etc.

You should checkout startups. They would blow your mind.

I think it is funny that it's sewer, because a sewer is also a underground way around things, which is a good description of the out of band solution here. So the name checks out.

This is pretty awesome. Super relevant for the time because AI controlled workflows are desperate for a out of band solution like this.

The main thing I wonder is how well supported is it in cloud environements? AKS/EKS/etc?

The obvious business opportunity here is for some lawyer to start running an AI service to do these kinds of things. Anyone who subscribes is a client of the lawyer, who owns the chatbot infrastructure, which would be protected under attorney client privilege.

The fake key for real key thing seems like a problem. A lot of enterprise scanning tools look for keys in repos and other locations and you will get a lot of false positives.

Otherwise this is cool, we need more competition here.

This is the real issue. Mac is not a target for a large number of triple A games, and rosetta made that possible. Apple has a vested interest because if they support rosetta you don't need to by Windows laptops to game... you can just use your Mac. Otherwise they are routing money to their competition.

This is awful. I love playing games on my MBP and the latest crossover releases have been amazing in the ability to play almost all windows PC games at full speed. Losing rosetta means crossover is dead.

You would hope that apple would open source it, but they are one of the worst companies in the world for open sourcing things. Shame on all their engineers.

I can see why that sounds sensible, but my personal obsevations are that heavy duty power users almost universally prefer the bigger screens, and those people also want the highest level settings. Most people I know who want smaller screens are not serious power users.

I can see an overlap with people who want smaller computers who also want max power, but I just would not believe that is a significant group. (again, all personal observations)

You don't pay your doctors, insurance does, so I mostly expect insurance will replace doctors with chatbots as soon as its feasible. Sadly in a large percentage of scenarios that would actually be an improved outcome. (yes, not all and those are the ones that will probably kill you... but come on, medicine is such a disaster its should be completley rebooted)

He is a horrible apple shill, but he does have great insight and articulate reasoning on why things are the way they are. We should figure out where the block is and remove it.

It has NOTHING to do with regulatory capture.

The US is polarized with the republicans not wanting any socialized health care because they don't want to care for people not like them. You can't organize and correctly run a health care systems when half you politicians actively sabotage and burn it down.

>>M4 Pro has less memory bandwidth than the P40, so it would be slower

Why do you say this? I thought the p40 only had a memory bandwidth of 346 Gbytes/sec. The m4 is 546 GB/s. So the macbook should kick the crap out of the p40.

I built a serverless startup (GalaticFog) about 8 years ago, had to shut it down. Market never developed. There were some obvious lessons learned.

First most companies thought they needed to do containers before serverless, and frankly it took them a while to get good at that.

Second the programming model was crap. It's really hard to debug across a bunch of function calls that are completely seperate apps. It's just a lot of work, and it made you want to go monolith and containers.

Third, the spin up time was a deal killer in that most people would not let that go, and wanted something always running so there was no latency. Sure workload exist that do not require that, but they are niche, and serverless stayed niche.

I think they say that because it used to be only supercomputers that could do a petaflop of compute. So taking what used to be a datacenter(15 years ago) and cramming it into a small device is a pretty impressive feat.

I work in a large enterprise company, have both windows and mac machines, and excel works equally great in both, but more and more excel runs in a browser.

We mostly email links to spreadsheets running in cloud. So it really doesn't matter what your OS is any more from an excel perspective, as long as your computer can run a modern browser you are good.

This is only partly true. AI works really well on very legacy codebases like cobol and mainframe, and it's very good at converting that to modern languages and architectures. It's all the stuff from like 2001-2015 that it gets weird on.

I agree with this. But the reason is that AI does better the more constrained it is, and existing codebases come with constraints.

That said, if you are using Gen AI without a advanced rag system feeding it lots of constraints and patterns/templates I wish you luck.

Some of us look forward to that future where you mostly just interact with AI. The one depressing us is not turning running over our goverment to AI. The sooner we can do that the better, you can't trust humans.

My company uses the Dora metrics to measure the productivity of teams and those metrics are incredibly good.

This is pretty par for course for startups. I've seen companies that raised money ask their VCs to not to invest in competitors many many times.

Not soon enough, and it will never happen for tier-1 cloud providers, and Microsoft is one of those.

Anyone who recommends using an AI detector should be the first person fired. No one cares if you use AI or not... judge the fk'ing writing and the quality of the work and stop being a blocker to progress. Same goes for education... and any where else AI touches... fighting calculators and slide rules was a stupid waste of time, and so is fighting AI.

Well both things can be true at the same time.

I agree Numenta missed the boat, but it doesn't mean that book wasn't prescient. Numenta just didn't get there first, wasn't a fast follower, and blew a huge lead in AI. It may still end up the HTM is one of the final state solution,s but they are so far from ever being able to capitalize on it that it is unlikely to even matter if they invented the concept.