frevib

> It started reminding me of the strategy where Google lowered the quality of the search results, forcing users to search several times, and see several times as many ads. And if that worked for Google, how is it not going to work for AI? Specially in the uncertain financial times the AI companies are going through, do you really think they would not do it? Come on. They will do this and more.

We’re using an online, undeterministic, black-box middleman to generate our code. It’s 100% Trust me bro. No proof, no scrutiny, no guarantees.

We use them en they have improved a lot in the last year. For edge services they have all the important thing like ddos protection and edge scripting. There is no replacement for Cloudflare Tunnel, but frp [1] is a good alternative.

We don’t miss Cloudflare one bit.

[1] https://github.com/fatedier/frp

> AI is empowering us to replace crappy vendor software with something better

Really hope this to be true, but I think companies will go for crappy vendor software than one-man, unvetted, vibe coded software.

Great effort, thanks for that.

But do we still trust the open source software that is created now everything is vibe coded?

Recently there was a thread about Chatto [1], a Slack replacement completely vibe coded by one person. It works and looks nice. But looking at the code, I wouldn’t trust any of my personal information to it. It’s just tousands of lines of skills and vague instructions. It seems that trust in OSS is eroding and big SaaS might win here because they have the reputation.

[1] https://github.com/chattocorp/chatto

There are trade-offs, but there huge differences in quality between say a Michelin or Pirelli and a cheap Chinese brand.

> Whst is this bit of code doing?

This only applies to bad code. A formal programmic language beats an informal language anytime. Why on earth would you translate an unambiguous formal language to English?

> Is there a risk of data leaking here?

> Are permissions enforced downstream of this function?

If you trust AI to give you that answer, you are going to run into serious issues.

Currently the bad quality of architecture and holistic view of models is probably explained by the fact that the models just cannot do it. Free markets and China will make sure of that, kind of. In reality Claude and Codex are better and provide much better tooling, so not much competition from free markets and self-hosted models from China, I think.

Then when competition really settles to monoploy or duopoly, like it always does in bigtech, it is really difficult to prove Anthropic and OpenAI enshittify their models. Same with Opus 4.6, that suddenly was worse when 4.7 came out.

> I don't think this clear lack of ability is some conspiracy.

Maybe currently not. But we will never be able to know, as models are undeterministic and benchmarks are kind of scams. When you cannot prove that something gets worse, rest assured companies will to it.

No surprise, LLM companies optimize for waste. More tokens, and more prompts means more revenue. Reminds of Google’s Prabhakar Raghavan story: deliberately making search worse [1]

[1]: https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/24/naming-names/#prabhakar-r...

Any recommendations for an OSS maps app that provides tracks like Strava,l and Komoot?

You shouldn’t use ORM entities as domain models. The domain should not depend on anything from the integration layer (db entities, REST request/ response, etc).

Ideally models are generated from SQL schemas, which you map to domain models.

Scaleway and OVH. Upcloud close second.

At this point Anthropic is a pure marketing and PR company. Super catchy names like Opus, Mythos and Fable trying to get you to think that these software products are actually super-human life changing experiences. Boris Cherny coming to HN “Hi! it’s Boris from the Claude Code team” to get real tech people’s goodwill.

From Opus 4.6 there are no noticeable improvements for me in code generation. It works very well, till 90% completion, if you guide it correctly. And you need a little luck. For serious production code I need to understand what I’m doing so it helps a bit, sometimes.

This guy dubbed it “get Komooted”, as they pulled the same trick for used-to-be-great cycling app Komoot: https://bikepacking.com/plog/when-we-get-komooted/

The app quality almost immediately went down the drain after the acquisition by Bending Spoons.

“the reality of AI right now is that it only works for coding.”

Kind of…

I think saying no is more important now with AI, as features can be built so quickly now. But there are a lot more costs after the feature has been built. Mostly with AI the code isn’t understood that well, wich incurs a cognitive debt. Then there are extra maintentance and documentation costs. And the costs of carrying around features that add no value.

I can imagine that if you’re a startup and want to try new features quickly, it makes sense to say yes more. But the senior mentioned in the article will also be able to understand that.

Code is a liability. Saying no is because the engineer wants to reduce complexity, not because she/ he is so subjectively “obsessed” with code quality. The term “quality” is nowadays misunderstood by management. It means the right amount of effort to build the product as fast and for as low as cost possible, taking into account a team of engineers that can easily add and modify code.

This description is the better one: https://www.nair.sh/guides-and-opinions/communicating-your-e...

CLOUD Act and FISA §702

They’re not doing too great atm: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/topstocks/kyndryl-s-stock-is...

> AFAIK Solvinity can't access the data.

Solvinity is the hoster. It can fully access the stack.

Scaleway has introduced Edge services recently: https://www.scaleway.com/en/edge-services/

No ddos protection yet.

To the user: friendly message with uuid.

In the logs: detailed technical message with uuid.

> without a solid privacy guarantee.

That’s a promise, no technical guarantee. Then there’s Cloud Act and FISA.

> Google is likely very happy to give up on the privacy violations

“likely”, exactly. This can change any time. We’ll just have to trust them. Scrolling through this thread it seems about zero trust in a US ad company who’s specialty is feeding off people’s privacy.

We should by now demanding technical guarantees. Open source, end-to-end encrypted with e.g. an overseer board checking the company. Companies like Proton are doing this.

Same here. They’re subsidized by taking kids’ privacy.

Please not the schools. We don’t need privacy-invading closed systems with built-in slot machines. We need deterministic open systems where kids’ privacy is protected.

Please not schools…

> I've have personally never seen a good example where a cross vendor account provisioning actually working.

At enterprise level, account provisioning with SCIM is the industry standard.

Drilling alone is €10.000. The whole installation of a air/water heat pump is €10.000. Mostly not worth it.

> What part of GitHub's executives' grand plan is "have a barely-functional service

What about lock-in, being a monopoly? Why wouldn’t you maximize on saving costs? Sure some people leave, but the majority is not going anywhere. And if the platform dies they’ve made more money than to keep it alive.

I mean the stars, social features and branding of Github make it more or less a lock-in. You can go somewhere else, but it’s not the same experience.

> If you think you need those sweet GitHub stars, I can't help you.

The majority of users need it.