lnrd

Personally I don't use CLI anymore, Codex app is very good and it starts to look like how IDEs will be in the future. You can review code in a GitHub style diff and leave inline comments (super useful), have multiple agents work in parallel with or without worktrees, plus there is very good code navigation (especially if you ask followup clarification questions that will link to other parts of code).

> A host of reasoned declarations and open letters to protect/guide the math research community have been released over the past few months, spiking in intensity after OpenAI announced their solution to the Millennium Prize variant of Navier-Stokes. They quickly gained widespread support among mathematicians. The Leiden Declaration already has 4,000+ signatories, Math and AI has 7,000+, and even the open letter opposing the Caltech Mathathon has 2,000+.

> Among non-mathematicians, the public response was more sympathetic than not, but I observed a vocal minority (particularly from the technology and economics communities) with reasoned objections, generally saying that the mathematicians should adapt and cede control in the new AI world.

Interesting how Software Engineers, instead, seem to have given up early without any declarations or open letters.

This is plain untrue and misinformed, there's an entire category of companies where the whole business model is to pump money into ads to push their own apps and games. They carefully make sure that cost to acquire one paying user is lower than the amount of money the paying user brings. They usually achieve this by aggressive conversion tactics in the app and overly optimized ads with hundreds of variants. There's a whole industry built around this.

This app has 15/20 screens, an app this small wouldn't employ many people to begin with. Before there was one guy (op) maintaining it in react native and now he maintains it native. I don't see much change tbh.

> They intentionally threw $15 million in compute at the problem

what? really?

> Even if it's broken (which it didn't seem to be) it's just FE anyway so not the end of the world.

Last week alone I was unable to access two major websites because their auth flow was broken (I was attempting to log in with Apple, so not "the happy path"). I was just locked out, had to contact support. I guess this mentality is what causes it.

We had safeguards and best practices built over the years of learnings to avoid introducing these kind of regressions. And we threw them away in half a year to...gain some productivity in delivering features that most likely the users don't even want.

It's "what if" thought exercise, doesn't need to be an accurate (or realistic) prediction.

I know Loupe, very cool project. Yes, as I said fingerprinting is the biggest risk, but personal data, photos, location, microphones, camera access are locked (which is what concerns most people).

Fingerprinting I would argue it's a problem on all platforms though, web included.

I'm a mobile dev and know the iOS ecosystem quite well, i can assure you that iOS APIs are locked and developers can access very little user data without user consent. What an iOS user is vulnerable to is fingerprinting (not too different than what happens on web tbh) and 0days. But given how valuable iOS 0days are it's unlikely they are used inside large scale generic apps and not for targeted attacks. Also it's unlikely that a random company sits on a 0days and uses it against its users.

So ultimately yes, installing an app on iOS is not a trust decision because the dev are very limited in what they can do. The biggest trust decision is toward Apple that might have private secret APIs allowing them to do things developers cannot. That's a possibility, but overall Apple business has never been around ads, big data and users profiling so the chances are not this high.

This is a step in an interesting direction for many reasons. First of all it reduces the "conversation in english" aspect and goes back to kinda "writing code" which I think would reduce a lot of fatigue and bring back some joy in making software. But then it also gives more control over the output in a way that makes sense: I know how i want to code this, but I can save time not having to deal with the syntax/boilerplate/actual writing. Also since I structured everything precisely, reviewing is going to be way easier. It requires though yet another mental shift in how to code: you stop chatting and you go back to writing in a text editor similarly to what you did before, the difference is that now you write some kind of scaffold instead than the actual code.

It has two problems though: if my approach has flaws the agent would implement it as-is even if could instead suggest an improvement. Also, an advantage of agents in huge codebases is that they can find where to make the change and draft it, which wouldn't work with this system.

Of course the Logitech mouse can be plugged and will just work without installation. The software allows to customize buttons, macros, DPI ranges, lights, etc. Still sucks, but it's not really needed to make it work or use it.

Never heard the words "basic economics" used outside of strawman political arguments. To think that H-1B developers can meaningfully shift the supply to the point that is felt by other people it's very shortsighted. The job market has been very difficult for years with vastly more supply than demand and its due to plenty economic, financial and political reasons. Interest rates itself affect it way more than any H-1B developer could ever do it. If you were to actually sit down and look deeply into it and look at the data, I'm sure that H-1B would be a small percentage of the problem and you would get fired up about so many other things.

But that's difficult and time consuming, if anything it's advanced economics and requires effort to decode what's happening. What it's very easy to do is getting angry at a group of people and to feel deep unfairness about it, then think that if that group of people were to leave, the problem would improve or be solved. That's exactly the kind of thought that seems to be so pervasive at all levels and yes, it is a scapegoat. Especially since that the only merit someone has over H-1B is to (by pure chance) having being born in a different place. I really feel that many people complaining against H-1B wouldn't even qualify for it if they were born somewhere else.

That works now because there are human made sources that the AI can find and summarize for you. But now there are no incentives at all for humans to write anything on the internet and if they do the content will be buried by hallucinated content someone else posted at a larger scale.

I had the similar experience to yours yesterday and it lead nowhere. Funnily enough I was also trying to configure a vpn on a router, google didn't return anything useful (besides a blog post clearly written by AI and with absolutely no information in it). Claude managed to give some interesting pointers, but its suggestions were not working and I also noticed that it started to hallucinate badly about ipv6 and gave me some suggestions that were just plain untrue. Claude Opus is smart, usually when it gets so convinced about something is after researching the internet and not just based on its training data. I wonder where it got so convinced about it. Maybe reading some other hallucinated blog post like the one I stumbled upon?