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

More robust in that it tolerates individualistic workers? Interesting.

More robust in that if everyone just does their jobs in accordance with process you potentially create process traps and settle into bad local maximums.

You need some number of people with ego to tell you what they really think, be resistant to things they see as bad, etc, etc. Otherwise you will waste untold sums in the time it takes to realize your mistakes they would have told you about a week after you rolled them out.


> Who is the buyer?

Who do you know who is currently sitting in a seat of massive power in the US Government, watches TV and says things like, "I need to have that! Why do we not have that already? It will project strength, and all the best governments project strength at every opportunity!"


Pretty sure trump knows about the f35 already

"How many of those did we order? Let's get some more. Super-size me!"

"And they should be called Trump Jets, and have gold trim on them! And be on a memecoin with my name on it".

Any way you slice it: LLMs provide real utility today, right now. Even yesterday, before Opus/Codex were updated. So the money was not all for naught. It seems very plausible given the progress made so far that this new industry will continue to deliver significant productivity gains.

If you want to worry about something, let's worry about what happens to humanity when the world we've become accustomed to is yanked out from underneath us in a span of 10-20 years.


Would it be any more comforting from a privacy standpoint to have the models capable of doing this running on the device itself instead of the cloud?

...yes?

The fact that you used the term "enforcement" here makes me presume you are thinking of criminal consequences. But the grandparent comment talks about civil liability. Certainly if there were injuries at this intersection and they knew who had altered the signage, attorneys would argue liability on the part of the vandal. They'd get settlements if not win cases this way.

In addition, if there were serious injuries here you should also expect some criminal consequences. But if your point was to suggest that they won't hunt you down just because someone said there was mischief here, I tend to agree.


Oh yeah, if one does it it’s probably not a good idea to leave an indelible note saying “this was done by Rene Wiltord living at 1038 John Doe Way, San Francisco, 94112”. If you do that, there’s a 1% chance you might get in trouble.

Stupid question: can't you just turn it off? Does it emit signals / identifying information while it's off?


It says it's off. You're a journalist reporting against a fascist regime. You, your family, and known associates will be tortured and killed if you are found. Do you trust it, or a mesh wire lined bag that physics says definitely will block it?


The regime will then just look through the transaction history of the faraday cage merchant and execute the five dollar wrench attack on every person who bought one.

Realistically, if your adversaries are capable of communicating with your phone while it's turned off or in airplane mode, your best solution is probably just to hit your phone with a five dollar wrench until it breaks.


I feel like if those are the stakes I'd be better off leaving it behind.


Here's an article that talks about Dual-energy CT [1]. And another one talking about material discrimination using DECT [2].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectral_imaging_(radiography)

[2] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2719491/


Neither of those articles seem to support the idea that you can do molecular analysis with x-rays. They are all about elemental analysis, which is not useful for the purpose of detecting explosives.


Not sure if they use dual-energy x-ray as in [0], but you don't need to if you take x-ray shot from different angles. Modern 3D reconstruction algorithms you can detect shape and volume of an object and estimate the material density through its absorption rate. A 100ml liquid explosive in a container will be distinguishable from water (or pepsi) by material density, which can be estimate from volume and absorption rate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-energy_X-ray_absorptiomet...


See also beepblap's comments further below where they elaborate on this a bit (it's not just simple dual-energy xray apparently).


Hm, isn't it enough to just detect water and flag everything else as suspicious?

If your liquid is 80%+ water (that covers all juices and soft drinks), it is not going to be an explosive, too much thermal ballast.


One thing that might be effective at limited-interaction recovery-from-ignoring-CLAUDE.md is the code-review plugin [1], which spawns agents who check that the changes conform to rules specified in CLAUDE.md.

[1] https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/blob/main/plugins/...


By the time they release something that outperforms Opus 4.5, Opus 5.2 will have been released which will probably be the new state-of-the-art.

But these open weight models are tremendously valuable contributions regardless.


Qwen 3 Max wasn’t originally open, or did they realease?



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

Search: