dddgghhbbfblk

The tap interaction is a bit janky on mobile.

That's impressive. I've only reported one bug to Chromium, years ago. It was a bug in their CSS engine and I included an HTML file with a full repro. It took them a few years to actually fix it since the person who was initially assigned it never bothered, eventually left Google, and nobody picked it back up for a while. But they did eventually fix it, so that's something, I suppose.

Edit: this comment elsewhere in the thread is closer to my experience: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47523107 Certainly in my own stint at Google I saw the same thing--bugs below a certain priority level would just never get looked at.

Hmmm, my anecdotal experience doesn't match up with this article. Personally I am seeing an explosion of AI-created apps. A number of different subreddits I use for disparate interests have been inundated with them lately. Show HN has experienced the same thing, no?

It's not irrational at all! The act of doing something yourself brings inherent pleasure and satisfaction, whether that thing is "growing tomatoes" or "coding a feature". It makes us feel useful.

>It's weird to see people getting fixated on the DDoS, which is obviously far less nasty than actually attempting to dox someone.

I would say the opposite... The DDoS is pretty obviously ridiculous, completely unacceptable, and entirely indefensible, while the blog post seems like whatever.

I honestly cannot fathom defending using your popular website as a tool to DDoS someone you have personal beef with, without the consent of the DDoSing participants.

I've been seeing variations on your comment a lot on HN lately and I find it a rather vapid way of looking at something so intricate as human communication. Among other things, the medium is the message!

I mean I assume it's a bot comment. It has that LLM stink to it in writing style even without the "new account" signal.

Unmodified Blu-ray disc images are the BDMV folders I mentioned. Any BDMV will be unmodified almost all the time though I've very occasionally run into modified ones originating from the Chinese piracy scene that had custom subs added.

A "good" remux is actually the highest quality movie release available, usually, if you don't care about file size. A good remux will combine all the best parts of every possible release into one super-file. For one movie, you could have the best video quality be on a French UHD Blu-ray, the best audio quality from a different source, subtitles aggregated from various international releases and streaming platforms (and filtered/deduped for quality), chapter titles taken from an old DVD, and all available commentary tracks collected. Rarely you might even see a hybrid release where multiple streams are spliced together to fix some problem or another in one of them. You can look for releases by the CINEPHILES p2p group for gold standard examples, they get distributed fairly widely so you can probably find some.

To answer what you asked about extra audio tracks specifically (outside of full disc images)--usually non-English dubs are considered bloat and aren't distributed. Commentary tracks are kept. Audio description is a mixed bag, good groups will keep it.

It's implemented in drive firmware, so the drive will refuse to read protected sectors without authentication.

You want to search for BDMV for full disc images, or for remuxes which are uncompressed video and audio streams, if you want to get a sense for the size on disc. Typical Blu-ray images will be from 20-40ish GB.

It's just an acquihire. On the startup's side, the company has failed and they would be shutting it down regardless; this way they've found jobs for their employees and saved face. On the acquirer's side, they've recruited a team that they think is worth hiring with a lower cost of sourcing them.

The acquirer usually isn't paying that much in a case like this. Unlike what some other comments in this thread say (I assume from people new to the industry), nobody's getting rich.

It appears that the original "research" was also pure AI slop--someone just asking Claude and quickly slapping together whatever it said. It's very low quality and should not be getting this much attention.

The touch functionality is useful until it isn't. My Pixel Buds will activate touch controls randomly and unnecessarily all the time when I'm trying to use them in bed, from the contact with the pillow or sheets. Drives me nuts.

But also, I don't think it's either/or for most people. I use both wired and wireless headphones all the time depending on the use case. Wired sounds far better and is more reliable, wireless is more mobile. Different use cases.

I don't spend much time on that subreddit, but I've seen that bot on a couple posts I've read and have been pleasantly surprised by how useful it seemed. I may eat my words on this later, but to me this is exactly the kind of application of AI that I have always thought was the most promising.

I think the comment you linked doesn't sound like AI at all, though. I do empathize with people worried about getting falsely accused of using AI in their writing, either hypothetically or in your case in actuality, but at the same time I kinda just think that's a skill issue on the part of the accusers.

This is very much a general "English reading skills" kind of test. A lot of people don't speak English as a first language, in which case I think it's entirely forgiveable. It's hard being attuned to things like writing style in a foreign language (I know from experience!). It's a pretty high level language skill, all things considered. And even among those who do speak English as a first language, there are many in this industry who don't have strong reading skills.

I do believe that personally my hit rate for calling out AI content is likely very high. Like many of us I've had the misfortune of reading more LLM output than is probably healthy for my brain.

One quick point:

>Those sentence constructions that are "tells" were also learned from good writers though.

I don't agree at all, I think the LLM style of writing is cribbed from like, LinkedIn and marketing slop. It's definitely not good writing.

I recently installed Fedora with KDE Plasma on a new computer and I can't say I feel the same way. The UI is still clunky (eg the file explorer is clunky) and I'm running into minor bugs pretty regularly. Windows will be sized incorrectly after a restore sometimes (failing to take into account the bar I added at the top), switching between multiple windows of the same program and a separate program seems non-deterministic, random UI components occasionally crash and restart.

I don't want to be negative for the sake of it but I constantly read these really positive comments about Linux on the desktop (in general or in specifics) and it gave me a false impression of what to expect. Not the first time I've fallen for this either over the years.

The other guy's post was also very obviously written at least in part by an LLM. It's slop all the way down.

I'm seriously considering taking a break from this site if this is the direction that everyone wants to go in.

>Every developer I know uses AI for coding now.

And for blogging too, it seems.

You're saying that term limits reduce corruption?

That's in fact not at all what the research says. There's a decent amount of research that suggests that they actually increase corruption. There's overwhelming evidence that they increase the power of lobbyists and interest groups.

This is a classic one of those ideas that many people intuitively "feel" makes sense but is actually just terrible policy.

No, Old English is pre-Norman invasion. I think you have (understandably) misunderstood what a "negative concord" means--it's when a double negative is still a negative, ie multiple negative elements agree with each other rather than cancel out. Like "I didn't hear no bell". A lot of languages are like this (eg Spanish).

In the OP article the sentence has both this "ne" and also a "never"

A moral stand? ... What? Did we read the same statement? It opens right out the gate with:

>I believe deeply in the existential importance of using AI to defend the United States and other democracies, and to defeat our autocratic adversaries.

>Anthropic has therefore worked proactively to deploy our models to the Department of War and the intelligence community. We were the first frontier AI company to deploy our models in the US government’s classified networks, the first to deploy them at the National Laboratories, and the first to provide custom models for national security customers. Claude is extensively deployed across the Department of War and other national security agencies for mission-critical applications, such as intelligence analysis, modeling and simulation, operational planning, cyber operations, and more.

which I find frankly disgusting.

I cycle accounts on here too (probably time to end this one, now that you mention it) but I don't plan on stopping. I refuse to build a long term identity on a platform that refuses to let me delete old comments if I want to (HN's policy). Too much liability for doxing etc

I'm with you on the AI slop but your complaint on this post just sounds like bootlicking.

I would say that anarchist-style direct action against mass surveillance pretty much embodies the classic hacker ethos going back many decades at this point.

This website is under attack from relentless AI slop spam, both in submissions and in comments, and I have absolutely no idea what we can do about it. To me this stuff is an existential threat to a site like this.

I moderate a mid sized subreddit (few hundred thousand) and I ban AI spammers on sight with extreme prejudice, but I don't feel like that same attitude meshes well with HN.

I said "thinking about"... I have been thinking about many other things I wish I had time for too, like "getting eight hours of sleep" or "responding to a growing pile of emails that need attention".

And while your rude, completely unnecessary comment displays a lack of the basic human empathy that may be necessary to understand this, it is precisely during a time when my life and home are so busy and chaotic that I would most appreciate having them be better organized, yes.

But how dare I simply leave a comment saying I liked a project that someone shared.

This is really cool. With a newborn in the home I've been really thinking about projects like this recently. When you have a newborn things are so busy and hectic that it's easy to get overloaded and for things to slip through the cracks so I've been really wishing I had a dashboard like this somewhere to remind me that we need to take the dogs out or show how long it's been since the baby last ate or whatnot.

I think you are missing my point. Just because spelling can be inconsistent doesn't mean it's not conventional. We agree that certain letters and combinations of letters correspond to certain sounds--that's a convention. We could just as easily remap the letters in our alphabet to entirely different sounds from the ones they represent today and the resulting written text would be, on the surface, entirely incomprehensible, because we no longer understand the conventions being used.

In this particular case, there are several glyphs used in the older texts which we don't use any more today, which makes the older text both appear more "different" and, for most people, harder to read. But this is an artificial source of difficulty in this case. I acknowledge your point that some other spelling differences track pronunciation differences but this isn't always true.

As far as pronunciation changes that aren't captured in spelling changes, this is true most obviously for a lot of words whose spelling standardized during or before the Great Vowel Shift, like "day".

Should be "how far back in time can you read English?" The language itself is what is spoken and the writing, while obviously related, is its own issue. Spelling is conventional and spelling and alphabet changes don't necessarily correspond to anything meaningful in the spoken language; meanwhile there can be large changes in pronunciation and comprehensibility that are masked by an orthography that doesn't reflect them.

It's not a nit at all. This is some of the worst web design from a tech company that I've seen in a long time.

The article talks about this and in fact talks about how one of the advantages of the TUI was that by combining it with `tmux capture-pane` it ended up easier for Claude to use and iterate on, not harder.