zzzeek

you might want to check on what you "know" then....

"renowned vibe-coder Peter Steinberger"

what? that's a thing ? why would a vibe coder be "renowned"? I use Claude every day but this is just too much.

Mercurial was not better. Features like rebase /squash are not native to mercurial (even though they since added extensions for this) and the tool had a very rigid view of the commit history. I had all my projects on Mercurial for several years after using SVN, because it felt more similar to SVN and I had no mental concept of why you'd ever want something so crazy as "rebase" - commit histories looked the way I always remembered them looking with SVN, with tons of tiny commits like "fix comma", "fix syntax", and no steady concept of a commit hash linked to a complete, working change, because that was something I had never seen before. Basically I just didn't get it.

Today my workflow is based on git + gerrit code review (which is heavily based around git), or in other areas github pull requests, and there is no such thing as a series of little commits that all hodge-podge together to form a particular change to the code, we tailor changes to be perfect, we push -f to keep each commit in the series to be a full and CI-tested story of a change, then we squash-merge them. My use with git is 100% all day things that were impossible with Mercurial back when I used it, if there are extensions for these things now, they are afterthoughts, git understood these concepts from the beginning.

not really. Here's their own product clarifying:

Based on the terms, Section 3, subsection 2 prohibits using Claude/Anthropic's Services:

  "To develop any products or services that compete with our Services, including to develop or train any artificial intelligence or machine learning algorithms or models or resell the Services."

  Clarification:

  This restriction is specifically about competitive use - you cannot use Claude to build products that compete with Anthropic's offerings.

  What IS prohibited:
  - Using Claude to develop a competing AI assistant or chatbot service
  - Training models that would directly compete with Claude's capabilities
  - Building a product that would be a substitute for Anthropic's services

  What is NOT prohibited:
  - General ML/AI development for your own applications (computer vision, recommendation systems, fraud detection, etc.)
  - Using Claude as a coding assistant for ML projects
  - Training domain-specific models for your business needs
  - Research and educational ML work
  - Any ML development that doesn't create a competing AI service

  In short: I can absolutely help you develop and train ML models for legitimate use cases. The restriction only applies if you're trying to build something that would compete directly with Claude/Anthropic's core business.

So you can't use Claude to build your own chatbot that does anything remotely like Claude, which would be, basically any LLM chatbot.

right but nobody clicked the button on that one

right, so on the topic of "phishing emails designed to elicit enough emotion that you forget to consider the button might be a phish", the headline itself of this blog post is doing the exact same thing, really. The headline should be, "Phishing scams launched through SendGrid exploit deep political sentiments to achieve success" or something like that.

but that would be clear and very boring. nobody would read your blog then. A headline that very obviously implies Sendgrid the company supports ICE, and so much so that they are emailing all their customers about it, clicks galore. Well done.

literally hacker news. try flagging this one, mods

> All these AI agent tools need to come with no permissions at all out of the box, and everything should be granularly granted.

That's what the tools already do. if you were watching some cool demo that didnt have all the prompts they may have been running the tools in "yolo mode" which is not usually a normal thing.

im sure you could get procmail to do this, have fastmail forward to a self-hosted mail server with procmail and then have it go nuts. You can send mail from your own server using fastmail's servers with an API key.

so glad I got off gmail years ago once I saw stories of people's lives being completely cut off due to "suspicious CC activity". Fastmail is the way to go

"you're posting too fast; please slow down"

my fear is people are going to post issue reports, sometimes good ones that we need to act upon, they get autoclosed, and the submitter either never bothers to re-post or they are so annoyed that they don't re-post.

it would be way better if there was only one way for them to get their content in, in the first place

Yes this is the identical pattern we strive for at SQLAlchemy.

However github has no option to close issues to contributors only.

These folks do what we do, they have an issue template called "do not use this". big whoop. People blow through those all day so we're clicking on "convert to discussion" all day.

Github please add this feature!

> However, AI infrastructure cannot wait for the grid’s multiyear transmission upgrades. An AI cloud can generate revenue of $10-12 billion dollars per gigawatt, annually. Getting a 400 MW datacenter online even six months earlier is worth billions. Economic need dwarfs problems like an overloaded electric grid. The industry is already searching for new solutions.

wow, that's some logic. Environmentally unsound means of extracting energy directly damage the ecosystem in which humans need to live. The need for a functioning ecosystem "dwarfs" "problems" like billionaires not making enough billions. Fixing a ruined ecosystem would cost many more billions than whatever economic revenue the AI generated while ruining it. So if you're not harnessing the sun or wind (forget about the latter in the US right now, btw), you're burning things, and you can get lost with that.

This kind of short sighted thinking is because when folks like this talk about generating billions of dollars of worth, their cerebellums are firing up as they think of themselves personally as billionaires, corrupting their overall thought processes. We really need to tax billionaires out of existence.

> And then uv arrived. And they disapeared for those people.

I'm not arguing against tools that make things as easy as possible for non programmers, I'm arguing against gigantic forks in the Python installation ecosystem. Forks like these are harmful to the tooling, I'm already suffering quite a bit due to the flake8/ruff forking where ruff made a much better linter engine but didnt feel like implementing plugins, so everyone is stuck on what I feel is a mediocre set of linting tools. Just overall I don't like Astral's style and I think a for-profit startup forking out huge chunks of the Python ecosystem is going to be a bad thing long term.

Oh, well yes the ff tool shown here is a classic 80% kind of thing for sure . Claude OTOH will get you about 98% and can explain the options to you as well

sure here's a command that a program I wrote to record my practicing and produce different mixes uses

    /usr/bin/ffmpeg -i "/path/to/musicfile.mp3" -i "/path/to/covertune.mp3" \
       -filter_complex [1:a]volume=1[track1];[0a][track1]amix=normalize=false[output] \
       -map [output] -b:a 192k -metadata title=15:17:01 -metadata "artist=Me, 2025" \
       -metadata album=2025-12-23 "/path/to/file.mix.mp3"

chance of my coming up with that without deep poring over docs and tons of trial and error, or using claude (which is pretty much what I do nowadays): zero

> Maybe the strongest advantage of rust, on top of very clean and fast default behaviors, is that it attracts people that care about speed, safety and correctness. And those devs are more likely to spend time implementing fast software.

people who have this opinion should use Rust, not Python, at all. if Python code does not have sufficient speed, safety, and correctness for someone, it should not be used. Python's tools should be written in Python.

> The killer feature is, being a stand alone executable, it bypasses all python bootstrapping problems.

I can't speak for windows or macs but on Linux, system pythons are standard, and there is no "bootstrapping problem" using well known utilities that happen to be written in Python.

> real threads, no need for multi-processing

parallel downloads don't need multi-processing since this is an IO bound usecase. asyncio or GIL-threads (which unblock on IO) would be perfectly fine. native threads will eventually be the default also.

> pip could implement parallel downloads, global caching, and metadata-only resolution tomorrow. It doesn’t, largely because backwards compatibility with fifteen years of edge cases takes precedence. But it means pip will always be slower than a tool that starts fresh with modern assumptions.

what does backwards compatibility have to do with parallel downloads? or global caching? The metadata-only resolution is the only backwards compatible issue in there and pip can run without a setup.py file being present if pyproject.toml is there.

Short answer is most, or at least a whole lot, of the improvements in uv could be integrated into pip as well (especially parallelizing downloads). But they're not, because there is uv instead, which is also maintained by a for-profit startup. so pip is the loser

not even, anyone still left at DOJ working to protect the president is immensely corrupt, and this is just that careless stupidity that typically goes along with deeply corrupt people.

it seems obvious for nostalgic reasons

great. Spotify just removes things all the time (things I actively listen to and work on for my jazz practices, one day just go "poof" because they didn't want to pay the record company anymore), and they are not as a company deserving of the role of "keeper of all the world's music". They don't give a shit and they'd vastly prefer we all listen to their AI generated royalty free crap and Joe Rogan.

oh....no, not really, no, the world needs GPS, so, yeah. this is not like scrooge mcduck telling you to be at work on time. scrooge still has a windup watch

Paging MacKenzie Scott....

I didnt say the LLM does not make mistakes, I said the idea that a reviewer is going to miss them at some rate that is any different from mistakes a human would make, is ridiculous.

Missing in these discussions is what kinds of code people are talking about. Clearly if we're talking about a dense, highly mathematical algorithm, I would not have an LLM anywhere near that. We are talking about day-to-day boilerplate / plumbing stuff. The vast majority of boring grunt work that is not intellectually stimulating. If your job is all Carnegie-Mellon level PHD algorithm work, then good for you.

edit: I get that it looks like you made this account four days ago to troll HN on AI stuff. I get it, I have a bit of a mission here to pointedly oppose the entrenched culture (namely the extreme right wing elements of it). But your trolling is careless and repetitive enough that it looks like.....is this an LLM account instructed to troll HN users on LLM use ? funny

from some of the engineers I've debated this over, I think some of them have just dug their heels in at this point and have decided they're never going to use LLM tools period, and are just clinging to the original arguments without really examining the reality of the situation. In particular this "The LLM is going to hallucinate subtle bugs I can't catch" one. The idea that LLMs make subtle mistakes that are somehow more subtle, insidious and uncatchable compared to any random 25 pull requests you get from humans is simply ridiculous. The LLM makes mistakes that stick out to you like a sore thumb, because they're not your mistakes. The hardest mistakes to catch are your own, because your thinking patterns are what made them in the first place.

The biggest problem with LLMs for code that is ongoing is that they have no ability to express low confidence in solutions where they don't really have an answer, instead they just hallucinate things. Claude will write ten great bash lines for you but then on the eleventh it will completely hallucinate an option on some linux utility you hardly have time to care about, where the correct answer is "these tools don't actually do that and I dont have an easy answer for how you could do that". At this point I am very keen to notice when Claude gets itself into an endless ongoing loop of thought that I'm going about something the wrong way. Someone less experienced would have a very hard time recognizing the difference.

> I certainly wouldn’t want my children getting exposed to books that normalise trans ideology, for example.

fortunately "trans ideology" is a nonexistent boogeyman made up by whatever vile youtube videos or FOX news you're watching, so there's no worry about such books existing

because that would suggest something very bad is happening in the US and the HN party line is "this is nothing unusual, typical woke [1] panic attack over nothing, now please get back to your HN job of trying to win VC money"

[1] https://paulgraham.com/woke.html

dunno, but this is only actions. You can use github without being dependent on actions.