satvikpendem

Read Refactoring UI, originally written by the Tailwind devs. They also used to have a blog with some good articles: https://medium.com/refactoring-ui/7-practical-tips-for-cheat...

I don't see the word "immediately" in their comment.

Ironic, enjoying writing yet not catching that "every bit" does not literally mean every bit but an overwhelming majority instead. That some people like writing does not negate their comment.

Please read the entire opinion first as it explains exactly what the government thinks. The majority of the court says the Department reasonably worried that Claude-supported “critical defense system[s]” might “fail[] to engage” as expected. Those are concerns about how a supplier-controlled model performs inside a system, not merely politicking. See the opinion, especially pp. 12 and 19–21: https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/docs/2026/09/26-104.... My point about Fable or adding a backdoor is not that they do that, it's that they have a documented history of trying to change model behavior in unspecified ways just because they don't like a certain group of people and it is not worth the risk for the government to have something like that sprung upon them, at any point, at all. A private company cannot ever have the ability to dictate to the government what it can and cannot do, and if that company doesn't want to comply, the government is reasonable in excising them from their systems, which is what this supply chain risk designation is.

> The backlash to the Fable release saw a number of social media influencers promoting a similar lie, which I frankly suspect was part of a coordinated Trumpist media effort.

Alright, not worth talking to conspiracy theorists (even if Anthropic literally said so in their release blog posts). I'm sure Wired is part of a "Trumpist media effort."

https://www.wired.com/story/anthropic-responds-to-backlash-o...

No, it's correct today with the best of our society's knowledge. You can't retroactively say it was wrong looking from today into the future. Only once we get to the future and something is overturned can we say the past decision wasn't correct.

Revanced has some issues with developer drama where the lead banned other devs so they moved to create Morphe. Also Morphe can patch a lot more apps than just YouTube.

Maybe I'm different because I actually like those features like the AI summaries, saves time on watching videos I don't think are worth it. In contrast NewPipe is quite buggy comparatively or simply not as clean in my experience (it queries each subscription and can take a while rather than streaming each subscription's new video one by one as in the regular YouTube app).

Quite a common thing to see online where strangers judge relationships off some small slice. You see it on reddit and relationship subs all the time.

They can, they haven't shown to try to do so yet unlike Anthropic which I've linked before in this thread. Of all AI companies Anthropic is the most untrustworthy even as it acts, well, the most anthropic.

Yes I really don't understand these sorts of replies people are making, it's like a missile manufacturer determining where and how their missiles can be used and bricking them mid flight if they detect they're going to a forbidden destination.

Maybe pre AI I'd have agreed with you but now agents are hacking entire systems and who's the say that if they're used in one part of the government that they won't infiltrate another part? People are not thinking broadly enough and just think this is some contractor not allowed to use Claude Code anymore. No, the world is changing rapidly.

They are wrong because Anthropic has a history of trying to sabotage people they don't trust, see the Fable release and the backlash from that.

Or use Morphe

Why use this over Morphe? You can download from Morphe and it'll skip sponsorship segments too as they all use yt-dlp underneath.

They circumvent YouTube ads but draw a line at in video ads? Their stance is inconsistent, not to also mention that lots of sponsorship ads can be unethical (see the outrage over BetterHelp) while normal YouTube ads don't have to be unethical.

But NewPipe clearly circumvents YouTube ads so not sure how they wouldn't have faced pressure otherwise, and it's actually more so that YouTube doesn't care about sponsorship segments as they make no money from it so NewPipe would be even more in the clear if they didn't block YouTube ads but blocked sponsorship segments.

Thanks, guess I didn't update my app. I also have Morphe which works fine for most videos.

> At most, I use these tools as search engines

I mean, that's why it's not writing good code then, since if you're not using it with an actual harness then it can't read your current code and contribute. Also there is a huge gap between models made more than 1 year ago now versus today's models.

If Claude adds a backdoor autonomously then Anthropic would have a form of control. Even if it doesn't, Claude would be following the will of its creator instead of the government which the latter obviously does not want. I am not sure why it's that hard to understand that the government does not want any part of its stack to be influenced by such a company. This is exactly what supply chain risk is.

Engineers can nevertheless also be marketers for their employer's products.

Just don't make it open note then? Or you provide the only notes or cheat sheet available to them at the start of each test. That's what some math tests I've had had done before and I believe the SAT also does the same thing with formulas in the back of the test to reference.

Claude Code can insert something into your code you are not aware of, like a backdoor in many millions of lines of code, especially as many people now aren't even reading the code anymore. How is this not blatantly obvious?

They didn't do it due to backlash but they have the capability and more importantly the culture to do so. It is correct that the government doesn't want anything to do with a company who'd act like that. By the way you're moving your argument, first you said "stop working" and when I proved you wrong then you talked about why it has any relevancy. You're the one who asked in the first place.

Lots of people also seem to want to deny something they don't like being ruled correctly.

Rulings are a type of law, as in the general term of something written down and set together (literally, leges) that binds one of the populace with their society. As I said, until they are modified by the legislature or struck down by another court, they are the law of the land.

Why would he have a field day with it? It seems he oscillates between finding models the greatest thing there is to being absolutely stupid so not sure in which direction you're implying he'd have a field day.

That's our point. No one hates all of it yet some people such as some of the Gen Alpha kids as shown in the article performatively act as if they do. Sounds like you're agreeing with us here in this thread.

Anthropic has a history of doing stuff like this: https://www.wired.com/story/anthropic-responds-to-backlash-o...

> But for researchers trying to use Claude Fable 5 for frontier AI development, Anthropic outlined a different approach. The firm would deliberately degrade the model’s performance in ways that were invisible to the user. The move would effectively sabotage researchers trying to use Claude to train competing AI models, which Anthropic explicitly bans in its terms of service.

https://www.wired.com/story/anthropic-responds-to-backlash-o...

It's not just "stop working," it's actively degrading the code.