xgbi

2008 was rushed, but at least the people rushing it were competent.

What would happen if the bubble burst tomorrow, with the clowns sitting at the helm of the USA?

I'm not sure your president would choose to save the American people rather than bailing our his CEO friends. There's money to be made as backshish if Trump bails Altman and Altman gives back a %age of this to his helper..

What happened of the deposits btw ??

I've seen the exact same in my reviews of some PRs on my team. The one with the static array and tests of presence/absence in this array is often appearing for some reason.

The most insulting: I once commented on the review that the test wasn't testing anything, an my colleague promptly launched his skill on my review and let claude remove the test. He didn't even read my comment.

Our hierarchy pushes for unrestricted AI use; now I just stop reading and refuse to review that kind of shit.

I like that metaphor, because it translates well into software:

- You have a problem.

- Someone takes the time to fix that problem for $10k worth of coding time.

- Now they sell 1000s of clients the same software for $99, with 0s of work.

What's is the difference with your case?

One comment on the auto language translation: the french version is comically bad :)

I'd rather read it in english where the wording is (kinda, Claude is visible) more on point.

I'm trying to understand why the C suite is reaching for AI. I mean, what is driving them to force people to use it so much ?

Is it fear of the business being copied elsewhere?

Is it because monetary incentives to lessen the workforce?

Is it just all rich people's clubs laundering the same idea that AI will solve their problems, and the Cxx come back from their retreats and make it their stance that all company should use AI because muy buddy at the golf course said it?

Is it the promise of x10 the productivity?

My company has been holding on raises for a few years, but it's open bar on AI usage. And I feel it in the reviews: some are expedited without even a human in the loop. It also outs people that have no care for the result, they push things they don't even understand. The C suite has words like "every developer pushing a MR should be able to explain why and how", and in the same week, push for full automation of the Spec -> Implementation -> MR -> Review flow.

I don't quite understand the endgame here.

Did you just use metaphor to show insight of the subject instead of exposing the real mechanism?

What would be the reason for the model to respond this? Can you explain for us plebs that don't have intimate knowledge of LLM internal architecture?

Show us recent rulings in the federal level in the US in favor of people/consumers and ill bail.

Way more technical, way smaller. HN is a lot more wide in terms of audience and subjects, Lobsters is mainly programming.

I love it.

How is Rocketlab valued 57B? They made $500M of revenue in 2025. This is 100x their entire balance sheet.

One of the founding books that really blew my mind and drove me on the path of software and hacking.

I was 17 in 2005 and discovered it by chance, and I’ve been binging on hard sf since then. Matrix and this were really transformative for me.

Also, for the longest of times I thought lobste.rs was a reference to this book :-)

Charles has very interesting takes on the modern world on his blog. I still read it with great passion.

What are you talking about ?

It says that the parental settings (when enabled!) are just letting children do whatever they want by default:

- buying overpriced objects - chat without any restriction online - play without interruption for long time

I think the first one is probably the most poignant: piping children into disguised gambling addiction by default seems like a major fault. Borderline illegal, if you ask me.

It looks a lot like a phony feature "let's add a parental control, it will make people feel like we're trustworthy and bring back more revenue. And please don't disable ingame purchases by default, this is our cash cow".