djeastm

I think state-of-the-art AI is going to be defense industry only from now on. We can have our toy drones but not the Predators and Reapers.

I think the author of the website should next work on some kind of alerting system for the owners of these webcams to let them know they're exposed and how to make them private.

Then everyone could get what they want: voyeurs can watch exhibitionists like God intended.

I don't think it needs research the person developing just has to care what the website looks like. A lot of people just want functionality. But there are also pre-made front-end skills that do a lot of that front-end "taste" legwork for you (still obviously pre-made, but not in the default Claude look)

Hmm... Didn't he try to pack the Supreme Court?

I think Anthropic could manage

He seems to be a good coder with poor judgment. But I think it would be wiser to manage him better than to fire him so long as he recognizes what he did was wrong. I'm a bit of a softie for the clueless, brilliant coders, though.

> Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Yeah for a side project I just switched over to DS4 and between Pro and Flash a few days ago I've spent $1.96 both for code work and some large LLM text processing tasks.

It feels to me as good as the last version of Opus I was using (I think 4.6 or 7?). I'm going direct through the DeepSeek API, not Openrouter.

It sounds like an ad-hoc rent strike. Not a great sign for an economy.

I think they mean playing different instruments not other instances of the same instrument. A tuba's interface differs from a violin's, etc.

Growth versus blue chip (do we even use that term anymore?)

>this is clearly targeting either vibecoders or people with extremely limited experience in software

From the PDF:

>Launch energy is generated from ephemeral forces, like your founder’s friends, prospective buyers at your investor’s other portfolio companies, or a Hacker News headline that drives a spike. Unfortunately, none of these reliably predicts what happens at week six or week twelve when that initial boost has faded

It looks like it's targeted to HN users

Yours is an "ends justify the means" argument, but are you comfortable with the way these cuts were done? Would you approve so robustly of your own research being cut with a keyword search for government-unapproved terms?

>using them for data labeling would be a waste of resources

Would it? It seems like they can spend a few months extracting intelligence and "taste" from their engineers then get years worth of it back from the AI.

>So you can then look at the diff and figure out what the vulnerabilities were.

It doesn't even take reading or understanding the vulnerabilities at all.

You just ask it to write tests and the tests themselves can be copied and pasted as bonafide exploits.

That reply is rather non-prescient:

>Lmfao anthropic is basically done, I don’t think they’ll survive. By 2026, they are done.

I'm not working on anything that interesting at the moment, but I just wanted to say that these threads are absolutely my favorite part of HN. Just so much creativity and hard work on display.

There's always been a premium paid for custom work, though. OP just paid off-the-rack prices for a custom-made suit.

Quality of what's produced in that medium might be one thing. People reading for pleasure are usually reading works published by authors that have gone through some sort of filtering process for quality. Sure, it might be "trashy" novels relative to literature, but at least there's a floor to the quality level or else it just doesn't get published.

But with the advent of other forms of media, more easily produced and consumed, the quality of what is being consumed is lower than the quality of pleasure reading. Combine that with the firehose rate at which it's being consumed and pleasure reading seems better than it might once have.

It used to be called journalism

That's pretty neat. Thanks

Do you have a write-up on how it works under the hood or is it meant to be more mysterious?

Similar is when people refer to themselves or others as "content creators"

Not filmmakers or artists or writers... "content creators".

Like they exist just to produce a continual stream of this amorphous "content" for consumption.

Now, perhaps that's all that art/writing, etc ever was. But to just abandon even the pretense is another in a long line of surrenders we've made to commoditization.

I think their metaphor is apt. Microsoft Copilot is, in modern terms, the "harness" that "co-pilots" the LLM it manages sessions for, with you as the "pilot". So you are still piloting the LLM.

At least that's how it reads to me.

I wouldn't call that completely normal. It's certainly strict and controlling.

It's especially frustrating watching congressional hearings. Since both "sides" are aware that the cameras are rolling and that they are there to score points/create soundbites (rather than actually learn from each other--god forbid) it's just both sides talking past each other and not doing the analytical work of a good conversation.

Even when I'm on one side of the argument, it's just as frustrating to hear my own side just move on to their next pre-written question/response instead of engaging with the underlying issues. I want substantive debate and discussion and possibly consensus, but that's sadly not the reality in most cases of import.

Our interest in a statement is piqued more when it challenges our worldview. It's impolite to a lot of people, but the attention economy rewards it.

Edit: Looks like they changed the title to be less provocative. Good for them

- Time is a scarce resource. Students do what they can to learn what they can, but if they're under the gun, they'll take the path of least resistance to make it to the next day (totally not like the business world, right?)

- In the interest of having well-rounded students, a lot of degree programs include subjects the student didn't want to sign up for, but have to. Even in something like CS, I knew a lot of people who liked the hardware side of it, but didn't like the software side and vice versa. So I can imagine a student justifying taking shortcuts that way.

- Psychological reasons like wanting to protect their ego. Maybe they had always done well in school and are now struggling, but don't want to ask for help, so they think why not just take a shortcut here and promise to do better next time, etc., etc.

Isn't GP talking about PhDs here? If they're PhDs I imagine they've already had good enough GPAs/were smart enough to be selected for the program.

I remember hearing (perhaps last year?) that the model companies have specifically tried to obfuscate the "thinking/reasoning" behind the decisions the models make so as to prevent cheaper models from training on the reasoning logs. So asking one "why did you do it like this" might be not fruitful.

Not sure if that's true or if it might be influencing what you're seeing, but it's a thought.