bhawks

There are many disappointing errors in this article that one would expect an author with such prestige to know better.

Friends don't let friends build decentralized content addressible storage on insecure hash functions. Nor do friends try to convince you to use insecure hash functions. Nor do they appeal to authority. They also warn you against signing the output of insecure hashes. Finally they don't bother making argument that it's not worth upgrading today because we might have to upgrade tomorrow too.

I see someone has raised 17 million for a new ai git frontend.

If you read further you'll see that in 2025 they spent $40 million additional and served 300000 people - so $130/user?

The metrics for this project don't sell it - the politics do. You'll either love it or hate it.

You're missing the parts where:

1: Roblox hosts your multiplayer gameservers in its pops for free, with a generous amount of free persistent storage and memory

1.a: Roblox handles scaling and SRE work for you for free - you're not going to be able to support millions of concurrent users yourself at that price point

2: when people buy robux on their phone the app store takes 20-30% of the dollar - but the player still gets 1 robux for each penny.

2.a: your game immediately is playable on iOS, android, PC, Mac, Xbox, PlayStation, questvr, etc etc - no fees for you to get this distribution.

3: Roblox pays out creator rewards - a redistribution of revenue - to experiences that reengage dormant users or are played by paying users even if your game itself has no purchasable items.

Roblox's economic model has a redistributive nature that isn't common in other economies. If you're just looking at the devex rate and not building on the platform you wouldn't immediately appreciate it.

Roblox games are all multiplayer - you get a game server running in their POPs and a generous amount of persistent storage and memory. How is that not a developer operational cost?

Creators don't have to pay any hosting - Roblox will serve their content even if a game doesnt monetize their users for free.

The way this economical is thru the redistribution of games that do monetize their users

| then they went back and said no, you need to remove those safeguards to which Anthropic is (rightly so) saying no.

So one thing to call out here is that the assumption that DoW is working on specifically these use cases is not bullet proof. They simply may not want to share with anthropic exactly what they are working on for natsec issues. /we can't tell you/ could violate the terms.

It is also dumb that DoW accepted these terms in the first place.

What a failure as a species that parents are not trusted or believed to be capable of raising their children. Therefore let's build out the panopticon.

CEL is useful for any custom computation you want to do on your critical path without having that blow out in a ridiculous fashion.

Yes you can embed other languages however constraining evaluation costs is not a first class feature.

The actions of the government should always be publicly observable. This is what keeps it accountable. The fear that a person might be unfairly treated due to a long past indiscretion does not outweigh the public's right to observe and hold the government to account.

Alternatively consider that you are assuming the worst behavior of the public and the best behavior of the government if you support this and it should be obvious the dangerous position this creates.

The only logical end of this is that they should ban 3d printers and cnc mills to unlicensed individuals. Which, is probably the goal. Things like 3d printers, drones, GPUs, general purpose computers, vpns, encryption, talking to people in private and the like are far too dangerous for the citizenry to be allowed to do without appropriate oversight and approval.

Every service provider dropped them. Cool weapon, let's use it more.

Thanks for proving the point.

Id agree if it were a VP of Eng (total mess) or Product (should know and be bought in on the dev process) but this is a VP of sales. Depending on the company they can be much more operational and I would just assume that they asked the individual due to familiarity or happenstance and didn't understand the level of effort to deliver.

Quickly understanding the urgency/importance of the ask while communicating the impact it is having on the deliverable is the right call. Good business people work like this all the time. Seeing the discussion is a good learning opportunity for a junior.

| My personal take is that folks involved with the change severely underestimated the societal impact that it had. The fact that proper build support is non-existent to this day shows that agents are not a priority. That's okay if it isn't a priority, but when it was communicated with Mockito I perceived it as "Mockito is holding the JVM ecosystem back by using dynamic attachment, please switch immediately and figure it out on your own".

Id like to hear the platform team's perspective on this. As it stands, it is a pretty sad state of affairs that such a prominent library in the ecosystem was made out to be the scapegoat for the adoption of a platform change. It is not a healthy thing to treat the library maintainer community like this.

J2ME was an alphabet soup of incompatible implementations stuck somewhere between Java 1.2 and 1.3. Getting code to run across device manufacturers was a huge engineering burden. In fact doing something like JetPack for that world would be technically impossible.

If Sun was offering some technically relevant foundation for the smartphone era, it would have been able to actually have some adoption. They were starting from a leading position (obviously - see blackberry or Nokia), and in the space of 3 to 4 years they completely disappeared.