sunrunner

> all AIs ever talk about is AI haha

To be fair, that seems to be (almost) all humans talk about now too.

It's hard for people to see a socialist benefit when everything about the current version of AI seems like it's going to have an intensely focused capitalist outcome throwing us all simultaneously forwards and backwards into technofeudalism.

Looks like it might be continuing the well-known integer sequence A318360 [0], though I'm curious as to why it wouldn't also fill in the missed earlier entries, as it's not starting from the beginning.

[0] https://oeis.org/A318360

> Yet it didn't transform into a Blizzard or Epic.

Now what was that thing about living long enough to become the villain.

> The question arises why are you even being hired for

Oh that's easy. Someone needs to review and approve edits and commands.

Workslop [1] in seemingly every possible dimension: excessive wording in Slack, with entire messages clearly not written or fully understood by the person writing; Notion pages with the same pattern; vast piles of internal engineering documents such as RFCs, ADRs and AVDs that were clearly not only not written by the author but also not even reviewed, ultimately conveying no information, a negative signal-to-noise ratio; the diagram equivalent of the same - visualisations with numerous typos and the characteristic visual quirks of diffusion-generated text, also conveying no actual information.

Agentic systems being deployed and adding more work in places: Slack messages now being picked up by workflows and AI integrations that automatically create messages, tickets, 'action items'; alerts triggering additional agentic investigation adding noise instead of reducing it (If you couldn't figure out actionable alerts before I'm not sure how an agentic system is going to help with that problem).

The removal or avoidance of individual accountability or ownership in many places: developer contributions that aren't understood by the person submitting them; loss of ownership and accountibility in work ("I asked Claude to...", "I worked with Claude to...", "Claude decided to...", "I don't know, Claude did it..."); destruction of trust between colleagues.

[1] https://hbr.org/2025/09/ai-generated-workslop-is-destroying-...

That looks like a whole lot of dimensions to measure without providing any clear way of actually doing so. Which I guess is the point? But what do management or less experienced devs actually do with the information in the standard after they’ve read it?

I still have Quantum Forge open in a tab. I think that probably says more about me than the game though?

I've found that adding "Make no mistakes." to my prompt usually helps with this kind of problem...

Which is, in Splash, just five colours away from HN orange. So close.

One could argue that it's RGB with 10 of the 256 values selected from each channel.

This is why I like the web colours list - there's usually something close enough to what I want that helps avoid the combination cognitive trap of a colour picker and choice paralysis.

I incorrectly assumed it was Brian Badonde (memory of old British sketch comedy resurfaced by the spelling) pronouncing diabetes, as in:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYU6M8B1xxw

Actually reading the error message

I always liked the code Easter egg in Ex Machina. A scene with Caleb has a Python script visible on screen that, when run, prints:

  ISBN = 9780199226559

This is Murray Shanahan’s Embodiment and the inner life: Cognition and Consciousness in the Space of Possible Minds, quite relevant to the film.

I paused the film to catch Lisbeth Salander, brilliant hacker and investigator, doing exactly this kind of complex query.

I guess the brilliant hacking was the bit you don’t see getting access to the super secure database in the first place?

That earns you a special position as one of a pair of guards in a labyrinth with two doors, one of which leads to freedom and the other to... ba-ba-ba-bum - certain death.

It was either that or Casual Finance.

> Enough people didn't understand it even with C

Yeah that's a good point, and perhaps explains why C was added in the first place.

I was going to say that B also shows the literal protagonist not really understanding it either, however now I think about it that reading doesn't track because as a player you've only been able to see one point of view at each branch along the way, so the other experiences are still happening in the background, just not observed by you.

> C is not the salvation we may think

I agree, and in fact the way C is presented in that moment (and maybe described throughout, it's been a while since I played through the game) also implies a 'nice' closure, or a victory that, like you say, doesn't really exist, on top of taking player's minds away from B.

I guess B is the more obvious existential horror, C is one you have to question a bit before it starts to feel wrong.

Maybe I'm misremembering, but I'm sure there was something on HN a few weeks ago about an electric typewriter that someone had connected to (I'm guessing) a Raspberry Pi? My search-fu is currently failing to find anything particularly recently, at the moment.

How about printing a QR code for a randomly generated private key for Satoshi Nakamoto's Bitcoin wallet, then every few days you get a tiny moment of excitement, hope, and then disappointment. It's still wasteful, but it could pay off big time?

I like to get into heated debates with friends that have played SOMA about whether or not the events in the ending that is presented to you were all necessary and effective, or perhaps undermined the overall message in some way.

Specifically (and no spoilers, but I will be talking structure), you see parts A -> B -> C.

I believe that part C makes the sequence of A -> B much less effective, by essentially removing a lot of the tension caused by seeing A, believing what it shows, and then immediately cutting to the reality of B.

C only really takes away some of that tension, and I feel like it was added because of concerns about how a simple A -> B -> fade to black, would leave players feeling. Arguably it's the truest representation of part of the game's message, but to me feels like a bit like it's shying away from really making you face the specific truth highlighted well by B.

Alternatively, keeping all the elements but playing them as A -> C -> B, would keep the message intended by seeing A -> B, and make it gentler for the player to receive, but ultimately remove the powerful effect of the buildup from A leading immediately to the reveal of B.

Dropping C entirely would lose the confirmation of 'Seeing both sides', however I believe A -> B is a more powerful vision, and players can come to question whether C even exists by themselves.

Just do the trick in reverse, surely?

  yes no > /dev/null

At least Boostrap pages were readable ;)

> this page is highly effective at conveying information

Is it though? If the page is near unreadable?

* Almost pure-black background rendering every not-pure-white colour barely readable

* Dark-grey and low saturation colours used almost everywhere, for both fonts and other coloured elements (the orange cells in the calendar are the most readable thing)

* Thin fonts - coupled with the dark grey colours this just adds to the readability issues

* Yet another incredibly long info-dump of a page

And then as far as actual information:

* Vanity metrics as the main information, that is a lot of things with no context or historical information

* A lot of aggregates and rollups that aren't that useful

No, I haven't tried Reader Mode.

It's a good demo for UI state syncing though, I'll give it that.

There's also awareness of the basilisk...

I searched for "Hey Google" and got this in response:

  Hey! I'm here and ready to help. What’s on your mind today? Whether you need to look up information, plan a trip, or get things done, just let me know!

> We paged for every single 500.

Assuming the existence of some kind of network (with zero guarantee of 100% reliability), how does this work in practice? Is each 500 treated as an event that needs investigation, even if the result of that would end up as 'a router dropped something from an internal buffer but the transaction as a whole was re-tried by a parent so the service itself recovered'?

> A website that sells merchandise was hacked

This is the least surprising thing I've read all year

> It's merchandise for Kash Patel

And this is one of the most

Really upping the stakes of "It works on my machine" with an escalation to "It works on multiple of my machines".