Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | more catoc's commentslogin

I was thinking the exact same thing: if you don’t change the weights, use identical “temperature” etc, the same prompt will yield the same output. Under the hood it’s still deterministic code running on a deterministic machine


This is incorrect. Temperature would need to be zero to get same result.


This is not correct. If the algorithm is deterministic and the random seed is the same, temperature can be anything and get the same result.

Same as using a seed to get the same map generated in Dwarf Fortress.


Thanks for replying, this is what I thought as well.


You’re right - TIL


Breaking encryption to stop criminals and CSAM-sharing bastards does not work. Breaking encryption will only harm honest, law-abiding citizens. Criminals will just use “illegal” real encryption. It’s easy, the implementation details are everywhere.

The EU knows this.

They’ll always include “CSAM” as a validation, but the true underlying desire is surveillance.


What is the additional security hazard you see?


Yet Another Browser Attack Surface. iTerm has already had a few mishaps in the security department .. adding another layer of stack to it just increases the risk.


From what I understand it’s just a WKWebView. I’m trying to understand why the embedding of a WKWebView poses additional risk because it’s embedded in iTerm? (aside from the suggested general earlier security mishaps).


> it’s just a WKWebView.

Yes, exactly. On top of the existing iTerm2 code, multiplying the attack vector surface significantly.


In my experience Dropbox is actually really good at syncing data between devices.

It’s fast. It’s way more reliable than iCloud, and for “simply” keeping folders in sync just “simply” the best - for simple user requirements simplicity and reliability are key. Did I stress ‘simple’ enough? Maybe I should stress it Latin? Simplex veri sigillum.

I hope they stick to their core business.


Specifically a right edge case


Nice!


I see this just as someone being genuinely enthusiastic about their own approach, and trying to convince people out of that enthusiasm, to make them experience the same happiness they are getting from it. I think most of us here are old enough to know not to take recommendations from some dude on the internet as obligations, which, for me, just leaves the enthusiasm between the lines.


He elected to move on before his shares were vested.

Many interesting, and probably true, replies about investors cheating out employees, but it seems very few people read the actual post.


Where can I real the actual post you are mentioning? The tweet only mentions "had to forfeit all of my vested shares earned over my 3.5+ years at Windsurf", which seems to conflict with your "before his shares were vested" statement.


Exactly this - if not at all about hours spent (at least that’s not a good metric; working less will benefit a burned out person; but the hours were not the root cause). The problem is lack of autonomy, lack of control over things you care about deeply. If those go out the window, the fire burns out quickly. Imho when this happens it’s usually because a company becomes too big, and the people in control lack subject matter expertise, have lost contact with the people that drive the company, and instead are guided by KPIs and the rules they enforced grasping for that feeling of being in control.


Ha! That’s nice.

I never realized 1.609 miles/km is close to the golden ratio (1.618)


It is quite clever. My own rule of thumb is "add half of the amount in miles, then 10% of the (original) amount in miles". What's interesting is that it happens to be just as precise as the method shown above (ie. 1.6 v 1.609 v 1.618 )


Number of lines of code… airplane weight… etc


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: