"no one lives in SF anymore, it's too crowded"
2,261 karma · joined June 5, 2018
> ...
> this all would’ve been very completable in 1977
first flight of the Shuttle was 1981.
I think you're vastly overestimating the ability of 70s-era spacewalks to assemble a spacecraft in orbit, including handling 600 pounds of radioactive material
> After 90 days of countdown, 21 days of warnings, and 14 days of grace, the envelope opens
vs
> it needs that company to still exist and be honest on the day it matters
> there's no company in the middle
which is it?
there's no middleman, but also I need to log in to your app regularly to avoid being declared dead?
godawful clickbait garbage.
is it, though?
I can imagine having a local Herdr instance and one running on a remote box somewhere, but I can't think of a use case where I'm trying to juggle N different Herdr instances and that overhead becomes a meaningful bottleneck.
> Getting to 1.0
> After this update, what I want is to make connecting those machines more convenient. You shouldn’t need to think about SSH or deal with complicated network setup. It should be easy to connect any machine, anywhere, through one Herdr account.
(emphasis added)
sigh. I'm a daily user of Herdr. I don't have a Herdr account today. I don't want a Herdr account. I don't need a Herdr account.
the product is not even to 1.0 yet and already the writing is on the wall for the path towards enshittification & acquisition by $bigco.
of course, I'm sure there will be some "usage without an account will still work" platitudes, but the trend of development is clearly going to be in the direction of features that "integrate" with the "developers using Herdr pay us money and/or we collect their data" business model.
> NBC News' Tom Llamas speaks with Tau Robotics CEO and co-founder Alexander Koch about how the robots work and the challenges of making them fully A.I. powered.
sounds like it's another "oh, it's totally a robot, trust us...yes, a worker from overseas might teleoperate it some percentage of the time. how often? well, that's a trade secret, you see"
this is a news story reported as unambiguous fact, but only based on claims from a single source.
and that single source has a pretty strong motivation for why they might lie or exaggerate the claims - X runs AI data centers and is facing criticism over them. it's in their interest to be able to portray that opposition as astroturfed by foreign interests.
did you see value in doing this, before LLMs? if so, why?
if you're going to be condescending like this, and then on top of that imply that you have some expertise or qualifications that I lack...
go ahead. tell me what that expertise is. don't be shy. PhD in marine engineering from the University of Panama? Six Sigma Black Belt certified in water pump maintenance & repair?
are you aware that they did that already?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_Canal_expansion_project
and that it took almost 10 years to complete?
if they had put you in charge instead, do you think you could have gotten it done faster?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_Canal
Construction began: 1 January 1881
Date completed: 15 August 1914
> The energy released when lowering can be stored either in gravitational energy of a mass, or be used to power a second parallel lock operated in counter phase (so while one lock is lowering ships say eastwards, the energy is used to raise ships traveling westwards, and afterwards their roles reverse). To speed up a second gravitational potential energy store (and optional flywheel) can be used to accelerate and decelerate the pumping.
if the canal didn't exist, and we were designing it as a greenfield project in 2026, that would definitely be a design worth considering.
could it be retrofitted onto the existing canal? sure, in theory.
in practice, they currently handle 36 ships per day, and lowering that limit by just 2-4 per day is significant enough that it makes international news [0]
so whatever retrofitting you have in mind, the construction would need to be done completely non-invasively, without disrupting the daily operation of the locks. it's nowhere near as simple as you're making it out to be.
0: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/economy/article/2026/08/21/panama-...
that's interesting, because your LLM decided to put this in the readme:
> Things that didn't work - kept in the repo on purpose.
...which is not what I'd expect to see from a tool that has been battle-tested in a private repo and then exported to a public repo for open-sourcing.
also:
> Caveats
> Single-node Docker on one laptop - no cluster, no replication, no network.
either you're lying about this being an internal tool you've used on real-world clusters/projects, or your LLM is lying on your behalf about this project only having been tested with Docker on a laptop. which is it?
"Show HN" really needs a dedicated subcategory for vibe-coded slop.
I look forward to someone building an agent, getting criminally charged for actions it takes, and then trying to use this argument in court.
"your honor, I'm uncomfortable being held responsible for this"
people are responsible for the actions they take. hiding behind "I just created an agent, then the agent committed the crime" is simply never going to fly.
in the real world, outside the Silicon Valley "agentic everything" filter bubble, this is a laughable question.
try to argue that you shouldn't be charged with attempted murder, because you didn't stab someone directly, instead you built a Rube Goldberg machine and the final step of the machine did the stabbing.
and likewise, try to argue that you didn't commit tax fraud or whatever, because there was actually a Rube Goldberg machine built out of GPUs in between you and the fraudulent documents. both attempts will be equally successful.
0: https://github.com/schapman1974/briskdb/pull/264/files#diff-...
the source you link to contradicts your own claims.
they say:
> we’ve found bugs in every Raft implementation we’ve tested, including HashiCorp Raft, Aeron Cluster, OpenRaft, and MicroRaft
(besides Go, that's 2 in Java and 1 in Rust)
the sad state of "journalism" in 2026.
someone just casually scrolling and looking at the pictures, and not reading the article carefully, might be misled by half of the images being "official" from Buick's press release, and half of them being stuff the author made up.
sure helps pad your story to make it look more in-depth, though.
"it generated a complicated math proof" doesn't mean anything in this context, because the prompt was uncontroversial, it was "try to solve this math problem".
you have your big fancy government LLM. one person wants to prompt it "generate a proposed peace plan with Iran" and a different person wants to prompt "generate bombing targets in Iran".
those two inputs can't co-exist. you have to choose between them. the process of making those choices is called politics. you cannot simply outsource it to a chatbot.
I'm sorry, but come on. this is ludicrously naive.
who writes the system prompt? who's allowed to approve changes to the system prompt?
and those people...can't be lobbied or bribed? why not?
LLMs are a big pile of GPUs. they are not a magic genie. don't ask them to fulfill your wishes.
Arch Linux disables AUR package adoption (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49123208)
yes, an LLM can write you a web crawler.
whose hardware are you going to run it on? what is the bill for that storage and compute going to look like, just to get to a baseline where you can answer a single general-purpose query?
Google famously sells ads to subsidize its search product. how are you going to bootstrap your ad revenue? and how much capital are you going to burn through while you do that?
> How hard would it be to engineer a new Google Drive and Docs suite?
many open-source clones of GDocs / GSuite already exist. many predate the LLM era and were human-written.
can your LLM slop-fork them? certainly.
but those existing clones already have a niche marketshare compared to Google's behemoth. what reason do you have to believe that yours will be any different?
> How hard would it be to create a new phone operating system?
hoo boy this one is the most detached from reality of them all.
for what hardware?
iPhones are famously locked-down, so you're probably going to be running on Android.
you can fork AOSP and call it Diordna if you want. you could even use good ol' search & replace to save some money on tokens doing the rename.
or, do you want to run it on your own custom hardware? head over to Shenzhen with a binder full of ChatGPT printouts showing your hardware design?
and again, how much capital are you going to burn through, in order to have your first "could be sold to a real customer" quality device?
you've constructed a false dichotomy here.
the government of a city with ~8 million people is capable of doing multiple things at the same time.
uh-huh, sure.
you want to show off "look what the LLM can do / look what I burned a bunch of tokens on"?
you want to brag about how your LLM-generated slop is somehow more maintainable than the original because blah blah blah Rust?
here [0] is the version history of Postgres. pick a version from the past. let's say 14.x because it's the most current that's still under active support.
have your LLM implement version parity with 14.x. show off how it passes all the tests blah blah blah.
then have it upgrade your codebase to parity with 15.x, implementing whatever new features and bugfixes that includes.
and have it generate an automated test that demonstrates upgrading an actual database from LLM-14.x to LLM-15.x and verifying there's no data loss or corruption. maybe even multiple such tests, if you're feeling fancy.
then lather, rinse and repeat with 16, 17, and 18.
and show off the diffs of each version. does the LLM rewrite a huge pile of already-working code in the process of each version upgrade? does it introduce new latent bugs in the process - the kind of things the existing test suite didn't think to explicitly test for?
"I took a static snapshot of code and converted it to another static snapshot of code" is meaningless. all you're doing is bragging about having more money than good sense.
the stability and trustworthiness of software like Postgres does not come from a one-time snapshot showing tests passing. it comes from the engineering process that produces the software and its test suite.
oh, and for shits and giggles, because this same test was so illuminating with the Bun "rewrite" into Rust, here is the file with the most unsafe blocks in the codebase:
> rg -c unsafe crates/backend/parser/gram_core/src/convert_ddl.rs
128
> wc -l crates/backend/parser/gram_core/src/convert_ddl.rs
2055 crates/backend/parser/gram_core/src/convert_ddl.rs
why is the parser unsafe at all?!?
wow, if you feed a bunch of burger recipes into an AI, it's able to output burger recipes. really groundbreaking research.
> Beyond rediscovery, the model generates new burgers with varying degrees of novelty, illustrated by two representative recipes, the Delicious Burger 1 with SDS = 3 and the Delicious Burger 2 with SDS = 6, which exhibit progressively more distinct ingredient profiles while retaining familiar burger structure
"novelty" is doing some heavy lifting here.
their "Delicious Burger 1" as shown is 151g (5.3oz) of meat, 75g each of tomato and pickle, 50 grams of onion...supported by a paltry 30 grams of bun. that thing is going to fall apart the second you pick it up.
that made me wonder if, when they conducted the taste test, did they actually follow the AI's recipe, which led to this:
> Our AI-generated recipes specify ingredients and quantities only, and do not include the processing or cooking steps needed to prepare the actual burgers. We therefore engage an executive chef to translate each ingredient list into standardized preparation, cooking, and assembly protocols, including ingredient handling, cutting, seasoning, cooking method, and burger assembly
huh would you look at that, I'm shocked to learn that hiding behind the "AI demonstrates amazing results" headline there's a "well obviously we also hired a human expert to fill in the gaps".
this is less of a scientific paper and more Stanford running a full-employment program for executive chefs in the Bay Area.
think about the distribution for "number of pictures a new Instagram user posts on their first day"
then think of how far of an outlier your behavior was.
because do I believe that some of the manufacturers are unable to ship a "disable location data" checkbox given a 2-year timeline? sure.
but do I believe that every single one of the auto manufacturers is unable to meet the 2-year deadline? no, absolutely not.
what seems more likely is that most of the manufacturers were able to meet the deadline, but a few of them don't have their shit together and weren't able to (possibly only for a subset of models)
and what should happen from there is the compliant cars get updated and can be sold, and the ones with updates that are behind schedule get pulled from the market until the update is available.
and like, that's the "free market" at work. if you write better automotive software that you're able to update more quickly, you'll be able to sell it even when requirements change. if you write bad software that's hard to update, you're going to end up losing sales because of it. and then companies that write better software will tend to succeed in the long run.
in particular with this regulation, it would be a significant black eye for a car dealership to say to a customer "you can't buy that car...why not? oh, well it tracks your location and phones home with that data. and that can't be turned off...to the point that their engineers had 2 years to add a checkbox disabling the feature and they couldn't do it"
so what happens instead is the automakers put up this united front where they try to insist that unless the law is changed to suit their demands, they will stop selling all cars across the entire state. which, no, fuck off, that's bullshit.
they should update the software to comply with the law. and if they can't do it, they should admit "yeah we baked location collection so deeply into the software that even on a 2-year timeframe we couldn't ship a simple checkbox that allowed disabling it".