tyleo

TBH it was informative for me because I've got family who applied for data center jobs. But I'll admit that you captured it all in your blurb. The article has a lot of fluff.

I don't like recurring fees so I paid the Lifetime price.

I DO NOT find it worth it but I LOVE Moshi. However, given that its lifetime, it's hard to say if it will one day be worth it. If my usage of AI on my phone picks up it could easily be worth it.

I do find the experience much better than Terminus.

What I'd recommend is paying once for a month and then deciding if the year or lifetime is worth it for you :)

Not only that, but you really want it to be a skill. The book _Making Software_ describes skills as things you can get better at through practice, and talents as things you're born with.

I'd like to think the time and practice I've put into software engineering has made me better at it. If that's not true, then there's no reason to prefer senior or principal engineers with years of experience over newcomers.

I've been using this the past few months after trying a few terminal apps for iOS. This is by far the best I've used so I wanted to share :)

I think we're saying the same thing. I suspect there were a lot of people saying, "this probably won't work," but the Secretary of Defense pursued it anyways until real problems materialized.

I don’t know much about this except that I know perfectly normal or even jacked men with lower than expected testosterone. I suspect messing with hormones based on the results of a test and no actual problems can unnecessarily alter mood.

So my theory—based mostly on conjecture—is that these tests selected people they didn’t expect and the treatments would do more harm than good.

I'd ask what outcome we are trying to achieve.

I keep getting downvoted for saying this but I still review all of my AI generated code. I feel like I’m sufficiently sped up.

Of course you can go faster if you don’t read the code at all, that’s always been true. But it seems like the ability to emit large quantities of text is already a huge leap in productivity. I don’t think these tools are good enough yet to offload all or our thinking into them.

I find it interesting when people say, “I need time away from the AI to think.” I use AI for development but I would not say I’ve offloaded my thinking to AI. AI is great for pushing text but I haven’t found its system design skills to be that good.

To me the design has always felt like the thinking though.

That does not sound like rack and forget. Just looking at prices it’s also way more expensive.

Lots of people use the Mac Mini to run the frontier models over night or while traveling. I have a rack in my basement and have thought about throwing one in. You can get a cheaper machine but Apple feels a little more, “rack and forget,” if you have less price sensitivity.

Mac Mini + MacBook Neo w/ ssh can be a better setup than MacBook Pro for many people.

I almost feel like there's some sort of paid campaign going on in Hacker News promoting the Chinese/open models. I feel like every day I'm hearing about how the frontier labs are dead but your experience is the same as mine. My company pays for Claude AND Codex but we never really use the open models for anything critical.

Democrats tend to get railed for it even though Republican presidents raise the debt more. It gives the impression that only Democrats are trying to fix it and Republicans give it more lip service but often make it worse.

I still don’t get it. It sounds like the business plan is to fund companies so they can offer compelling employment. That’s great but that’s no different than any other VC.

How is that different than normal VC? Most people I know get healthcare as soon as they are funded. The problem is what happens before that.

I welcome AI skepticism but Ed’s often does seem to be done in bad faith. I feel like his claims border on, “AI has no use case whatsoever.” Which clearly isn’t true in 2026.

This seems misinformed. Mac, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, Apple Silicon.

Not every product iteration changes the world, but they’ve pushed the industry forwards much more than most.

If they, “don’t really innovate,” who do you think does?

Agreed. I don’t know that HN readers should become slop filters more than they are already.

In my view, it has aspects of both leadership and development.

You need to direct agents to do work worth doing and then you need to understand the output. Some of the emotional parts of management are gone since agents don't care if you tell them to throw everything away and take a different approach. Some of the therapeutic parts of development are gone since you don't need to hand craft a clever code structure.

I wouldn't say it's more like one or the other though. One of the most important jobs of a leader is finding work worth doing for their team. One of the most important jobs of a developer is ensuring system cohesion. Both of these are hard jobs.

To me, AI failure cases look like doing either of these jobs poorly:

1. Writing a big pile of tools that really provides no user value

2. Not reading the code and ending up with broken systems

I don't know, there's some good reasons against it on the page. For example, needing to dig up tubing to make repairs.

I think these systems are really cool but it isn't clear that they are net positive. Even today I would suspect many parcels being too heavy or large for the tube system. You might just end up with the tube system AND vehicular delivery.

Tbh it doesn’t bother me entirely. I love this tool so much I’d pay for it.

VC funding can enshitify things but it can also improve them. Here’s hoping for the latter.

Your right! We should also reduce food safety requirements for McDonalds and other large restaurants. At their scale it’s just too hard to keep everything clean.

I’ve also noticed this with rust. Those target directories can get huge.

The old, “it doesn’t matter because AI doesn’t work,” argument.

I thought we were past this.

We’re at a small startup and we mix models. But mainly just between the major providers. I wouldn’t say it’s as much to avoid spending money as it is to get the maximum benefit out of different capability spectrums.

Wow I didn’t know about this technology but it sounds like seriously cool stuff

Part of it is the clash with the pages UI. Dark black cards in the middle of a light theme.

It’s an interesting thought. The growth is so extreme that if the S&P 500 fell 50% today it would reach levels last seen in 2022. Given that the timespan is so short, I’m honestly not sure it would be as bad for 401ks as people expect unless all of your investment was concentrated in the last 4 years.

I suppose it’s worse if your calculation is, “I’ll retire when my 401k hits $X absolute value,” but I think most people just retire at a certain age instead with risk spread across decades.

I’m suspicious of some quotes here, “80% of startups using Chinese models,” doesn’t seem quite right to me. I just interviewed at several startups and they were all using the US models. Maybe they have some minor use of Chinese models but the bread-and-butter of most of these businesses model use is the Claude and Codex subscriptions.

The chart at the top is somewhat confusing. It says, “lower is better” but the y-axis is inverted! So visually higher in the chart is better but lower in terms of # value.