ukuina

Interesting. Does the Wails renderer support the full set of what Webkit/Chromium supports?

This is a big deal, the highlight is Chrome autobrowse. Goes head-to-head with OpenAI Atlas.

Do the top sellers from the past year work on Linux?

I've been meaning to set up Bazzite on an older desktop.

More coverage: https://www.theverge.com/report/869004/moltbot-clawdbot-loca...

It's natural to assume that subagents will scale to the next level of abstraction; as you mentioned, they do not.

The unlock here is tmux-based session management for the teammates, with two-way communication using agent inbox. It works very well.

Only until Agent Commerce Protocol is more standardized: https://www.agenticcommerce.dev

Single-idea implementations ("one-trick ponies") will die off, and composites that are harder to disassemble will be worth more.

Aren't many of those tests? Why define them as linters?

Doesn't it lose prompts prior to the latest compaction?

> this time with *foresight*.

So much this! Nondeterministism in LLMs does not mean you simply "reroll" your prompt and hope for the best; the incremental reprompting is what helps.

It's because the velocity difference is no longer 25% between the slower and faster programmers.

Yes! And yes, there's a link to the Comment section if you click on the "Comments" summary header.

Up-to-date comment tallies are hard, since the summaries are only updated a few times a day.

That repo does not contain the source code for Claude Code.

Thanks for pointing this out, https://hackyournews.com should be up and running again!

*PIVOT!*

It is obvious now that CSS exposes great atomics with terrible dev ergonomics.

Look at MDN, the gold standard for web docs, on Grid: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Guides/Grid...

That's just the basic concepts!

Now look at how easy MUI's Grid is: https://mui.com/material-ui/react-grid/

Atomics vs Usability. Everyone needs CSS. No one needs to *write* CSS.

This article simply reinforces existing (and outdated) biases.

Complex legacy refactoring + Systems with poor documentation or unusual patterns + Architectural decisions requiring deep context: These go hand in hand. LLMs are really good at pulling these older systems apart, documenting, then refactoring them, tests and all. Exacerbated by poor documentation of domain expectations. Get your experts in a room weekly and record their rambling ideas and history of the system. Synthesize with an LLM against existing codebase. You'll get to 80% system comprehension in a matter of months.

Novel problem-solving with high stakes: This is the true bottleneck, and where engineers can shine. Risk assessment and recombination of ideas, with rapid prototyping.

Exactly, imagine what Claude can do in five years!

Is it the electricity, or is it quantum entanglement with Roko's Basilisk?

You might enjoy Lost Crown or Rogue Prince. They both have dashes and zippy moves.

To the sibling comments: Apple holds <10% of the worldwide PC market: https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2025-01-1...

Congrats on the move to Google!

Please allow me to rant to someone who can actually do something about this.

Vertex AI has been a nightmare to simply sign up, link a credit card, and start using Claude Sonnet (now available on Vertex AI).

The sheer number of steps required for this (failed) user journey is dizzying:

* AI Studio, get API key

* AI Studio, link payment method: Auto-creates GCP property, which is nice

* Punts to GCP to actually create the payment method and link to GCP property

* Try to use API key in Claude Code; need to find model name

* Look around to find actual model name, discover it is only deployed on some regions, thankfully, the property was created on the correct region

* Specify the new endpoint and API key, Claude Code throws API permissions errors

* Search around Vertex and find two different places where the model must be provisioned for the account

* Need to fill out a form to get approval to use Claude models on GCP

* Try Claude Code again, fails with API quota errors

* Check Vertex to find out the default quota for Sonnet 4.5 is 0 TPM (why is this a reasonable default?)

* Apply for quota increase to 10k tokens/minute (seemingly requires manual review)

* Get rejection email with no reasoning

* Apply for quota increase to 1 token/minute

* Get rejection email with no reasoning

* Give up

Then I went to Anthropic's own site, here's what that user journey looks like:

* console.anthropic.com, get API key

* Link credit card

* Launch Claude Code, specify API key

* Success

I don't think this is even a preferential thing with Claude Code, since the API key is working happily in OpenCode as well.

I wonder if OpenOMF has the same limits.

This is so neat looking. Is there an equivalent for MacOS?

At 0:52 in their demo video, there is a grammatical inconsistency in the agent's text output. The annotations in the video are therefore suspected to be created by humans after the fact. Is Google up to their old marketing/hyping tricks again?

> SIMA 2 Reasoning:

> The user wants me to go to the ‘tomato house’. Based on the description ‘ripe tomato’, I identify the red house down the street.

Very much this.

You are better off asking it a write a script to invoke itself N times across the task list.

The "loaded question" approach works for getting MUCH better pro/con lists, too, in general, across all LLMs.

> if LLMs "knew" when they're out of their depth, they could be much more useful.

I used to think this, but no longer sure.

Large-scale tasks just grind to a halt with more modern LLMs because of this perception of impassable complexity.

And it's not that they need extensive planning, the LLM knows what needs to be done (it'll even tell you!), it's just more work than will fit within a "session" (arbitrary) and so it would rather refuse than get started.

So you're now looking at TODOs, and hierarchical plans, and all this unnecessary pre-work even when the task scales horizontally very well (if it just jumped into it).

Is it really worth the time, though?

You are better off allowing your overworked neural pathways some much-needed rest.

That question was asked 8 years ago. Coincidence? I think not!