mr_mitm

In the original sense of the word, vibe coding means neither reading nor caring about the code: https://simonwillison.net/2025/Mar/19/vibe-coding/

Some would use the term "Agent Engineering" for what OP did.

Me neither, and it was the first thing I looked for. Instead I saw: "No ads. No hype. Just quiet wisdom". Okay then

No, he didn't. He offered to cover a case of beer for after our game at the park, but he didn't have a car, so he asked me to bring it and he'll pay for it. Afterwards he came to me (I never brought up the topic of money) and asked for my Paypal details. How am I in the wrong here?

The whole "I pay this time you pay next time" is already covered by "everybody brings a case once in a while", but if the guys without cars just ask someone else to pay for it when it's their turn it won't add up.

If you're going to make assumptions, perhaps start with those that don't paint me in a bad light.

I wish. The small inconvenience of putting in an IBAN and a matching name instead of just an email address is already enough for many people to default to paypal. Just happened to me again yesterday, the guy preferred to bring cash next time we see each other instead of just receiving my info via text.

> Germany has reported more than 5,000 excess deaths this year.

We're up to more than 15,000: https://www.rki.de/DE/Themen/Gesundheit-und-Gesellschaft/Ges...

Hard to keep up with lots of sites. At least provide a common interface, like an atom feed.

They're credences: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credence_(statistics)

Everybody has them, and they're not useless. Usually they're regularly updated when new information comes in.

And yet they struggle with the abstract concept. They'll wonder why the candidate with a projected 20% chance of winning won. They won't know what to do with the information of a 70% chance of rain tomorrow. "Either it will rain or it won't, which is it!" Perhaps it's the frequentist approach that comes more natural than the Bayesian approach, who knows.

This isn't my original thought, by the way. Someone wrote more about it here: https://towardsdatascience.com/humans-are-bad-at-probability...

I wish people had an intuitive understanding of probabilities. It seems the average person can only think in terms of "basically never happens", "fifty fifty" and "sure thing".

100 pages of dense mathematics created by Claude. It doesn't even have an abstract or a summary. What are we looking at here? Has anyone read this? Please explain like I'm not a math PhD.

Everybody can device an encryption algorithm that they can't break themselves. That is not sufficient.

Yes it is, for many use cases.

I'd argue the syntax is much simpler, more modern, and perhaps even more consistent (the fact that in TeX you can change the meaning of the escape symbol or the comment symbol is pure insanity IMHO). It can use any font, and the feature you know from LaTeX, a compiler, is free. Only the web application has some premium features. It's more like Overleaf. It's also several orders of magnitudes faster and has actually helpful error messages.

The fact that it was written in Rust is less than secondary.

Also, TeX was written in WEB, not C.

Fun fact: archive.is can even bypass a lot of hard paywalls and no one knows for sure how they do it. There's been at least on debate on HN with no clear conclusion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36060891

They probably use a combination of residential proxies, actually paying for a lot of subscriptions (including lots of small regional publications apparently) and cleverly removing the "My Account" link, referrer shenannigans, and who knows what else.

I just checked. The AI DJ showed me a suggested request button with the prompt "late afternoon reggae rock with Lorna Shore". That's like suggesting pickled fish with strawberry ice cream just because you happened to order both a few times.

You don't think they have a genuine interest in providing good recommendations? A good algorithm will hook viewers more than a bad one. For the algorithm to work, they need to know what you like, and perhaps why you like it.

> most software in the world uses a basic hash like MD5 or SHA-256 rather than a key derivation function

For passwords? Where do you get that information?

The cookie disaster is thanks to the ePrivacy Directive, which came before GDPR:

- https://www.edps.europa.eu/data-protection/our-work/subjects...

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPrivacy_Directive

Plus, the fact that they call the posts "truths" (as in "the president truthed", "ads are sponsored truths") couldn't be more Orwellian.

It's convenient for those who already use npm. You are almost always not forced to install npm. You can choose another packaging path (OP supports a multitude) or choose the less convenient path of building it yourself.

So be it. Publicly disclose the vulnerability and stop doing business with them.

My first one (That happened: Wine snobs) is already hilarious! Looks like LLMs are coming for comedians next.

AFAIK felonies in Germany require "intent", not "criminal intent". The guy could have stopped earlier, right after testing the password. But he decided to use it to view data which didn't belong to him. I realize I'm going against the general public opinion, but he didn't have to do that, and I can see why the court didn't accept "but I only did it to take screenshots" as a valid defense, because that's clearly intent.

The term is insufficiently defined and has overloaded meaning.

In the original sense of the word, i.e. creative use of technology? Debatable, and most techies would probably land on the "no" side of the debate.

Is it illegal? Depends on the jurisdiction and is up to a judge, but it probably falls under unauthorized modification of computer systems, so here the answer is probably "yes". IANAL, but lack of authorization mechanism is probably not a valid defense. AFAIK lawyers and judges do not follow the law to the letter independent of real world experience, so you can probably argue that if the UI didn't provide a way to cancel other people's appointments, then any reasonable person should realize it wasn't intended for public use and thus refrain from doing it. (Corollary: LLMs are not reasonable persons.) Just like an unlocked house door isn't an invitation to come in, you have to assume it was done accidentally (may depend on customs of the location, but where I come from it's pretty obvious).

Is it morally acceptable? Pretty clearly no. Even if it wasn't illegal, it's a jerk move.

It's a reference to this infamous post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224

Which also makes it not obvious how to uninstall it. pip/npm/cargo etc have well known mechanisms for that.

curl|sh is convenient for container images I guess.

From the article:

> “I had the projector set up outside and was waiting for the sun to set,” wrote one Facebook user in Colorado Springs, “but to my surprise I was simply living in the past. AI informed me the sunset had already happened.”

It does sound a bit bizarre.

Next up: "I didn't do a statistical analysis but the sample size seems small"

And here I thought using open source client software is the only way I, the user, can guarantee E2EE of my data.

> NONE of my agents have broken away from their tasks and then started to communicate to try to hack something.

With all due respect, you also aren't evaluating brand new models that haven't been released.

Go creates `~/go` by default. It's not even hidden. Unfortunately, saying it's not really used that much doesn't help with this.