ggrab

Cool find, but can't help myself thinking that registering a domain name and submitting a paper on this to Arxiv is a bit... much. The content here could fit in a tweet or a short blog post as well. Not sure about the scientific novelty here as we're basically poking around the very top layers of someone else's software stack?

There's definitely a need for this, but the underlying reason there's a need for this is so beyond me. I've worked with a lot of Software Engineers over the years, even at FAANG, that didn't have a good technical understanding of git (basically, your repo is a tree structure, most commands are just about manipulating that tree in some way). I mean, just spend the hour to go through a git tutorial. There's so many great ones like the interactive one that shows the tree as you go through the levels. It's your profession. Also, I think another layer on top of Git as this seems to propose won't fix it -- once something non-obvious happens, these people continue to be stuck.

I know, I know, pretty terrible and all, but can we take a moment to appreciate we’re able to ship to every browser a script that does 6000+ fetches in parallel. Sure, doesn’t go through network stack, but still impressive how far JS has come in terms of efficiency .

I don't think it's vibe coded garbage. Sure, the 3000-line print.ts is terrible, but there's some good patterns in there that were definitely prompted in by some experienced engineers -- the feature flag setup, the `..I_VERIFIED_THIS_IS_NOT_PATH_OR_CODE` funny type hints, the overall structure. Just the usual signs this started as a PoC but quickly evolved into something much bigger. The codebase is a really interesting read.

This is very cool, they are a common sight in some cities in Germany and I always love checking through them. I have to admit I expected some OSS library when I clicked the link, I need to touch grass more.

IMO the security pitchforking on OpenClaw is just so overdone. People without consideration for the implications will inevitably get burned, as we saw with the reddit posts "Agentic Coding tool X wiped my hard drive and apologized profusely". I work at a FAANG and every time you try something innovative the "policy people" will climb out of their holes and put random roadblocks in your way, not for the sake of actual security (that would be fine but would require actual engagement) but just to feel important, it reminds me of that.

Lots of negative sentiment on your comment, but I was going to write the same. Hopefully AI won’t make us forget that good command line tools are designed to be chained together if you want to achieve something that’s perhaps too niche as a use case to make it into a native command. It’s worth learning about swiss army utilities like xargs that make this easy (and fun)

I just really don’t think so. Let’s assume one of the scenarios mentioned in the article happens, say, the deadly self driving car update. I have a hard time seeing this blamed on the underlying technology and not the car company being reckless. Would you stop using your Claude Code because engineers at random car company pushed a bad update?

Also, comparison to Hindenburg is so weird. I guess the point they try to make is that both technologies are, at their core, unsafe, but main reason Hindenburg happened is Nazi Germany using Hydrogen over much safer Helium due to export restrictions, so basically flying around in a bomb. And then the technology was just naturally surpassed by commercial aviation.

Anyone else getting annoyed by these statistics AI generated websites are adding to everything? Like in this example, “0 lines of Python”. What does that even mean? Cool site though, but is it an ad for Copilot? Seems like it, and should be disclosed as such if that’s the case imo.