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

Machines are historically more obedient than people — so employing millions of AI agents to maintain your empire isn’t as fragile as enslaving millions of people. Historically its been the revolts of people, not the commoditization of resources that brought down empires

Without humans and our content, AI is irrelevant! For it to stay relevant I think it needs to pay every human for the daily content we all create (daily conversations, photos, videos) and choose to publish to web daily. Cloudflare only lets bots into our websites upon AI bots from all industries pay to enter our sites.

Overall if we want to keep this society economy we are use to with AI in the picture ... we need to thrive off of AI .. not just AI thriving off our backs and destroying the society we know.

Wrote about my idea how to get us all paid from the content we create daily last week on my substack https://ryanspahn.substack.com/p/ai-to-pay-for-all-americans...

Though we could all just go back to living off the land...


Banned Aid

If you want to get inspired by good component DX, try looking at Bevy, the game engine.

But essentially it comes down to traits, newtypes/enum variants, and macros.


I did have a look at bevy ECS approach and find it very verbose and really foreign, it’s in « not rust anymore» territory. Macros are a dangerous tool in terms of long term maintainability and are hurting compilation times.

But it’s still really fresh, they are conscious of the issues and I hope bevy maintainers came up with an elegant design


Right. Bevy has its own run time allocation and dependency system, and it's <<not rust anymore>>. It bypasses Rust's compile time ownership system using unsafe code. The encapsulation may be safe due to run time checking. It's bothersome that such things seem to be needed.

> It's bothersome that such things seem to be needed.

Yes. Rust is not a general purpose language. It's a systems language. Don't use it for GUIs and games and such until somebody has figured out how to do it properly.


All systems languages before Rust (granted, it's not a very long list) were successfully used for GUIs, games, embedded stuff and much more

You can't figure something out this complex without FAFO. Bevy is one flavor of FAFO. It seems to be working out alright so far.

This should be a lesson in bad communication. Not being clear about whats being trained on is a huge mistake. And this announcement really puts into focus the drawbacks to PostHog’s cringe forward brand ethos


dbg! Is your friend


When you took notes in class was it required of you to add original thought for it to be notes?


Taking notes in class is akin to making a transcript of what the teacher said in class so you can remember and refer to what was said in class. The encyclical is a written document, so there is no need for a transcript, and "notes" implies commentary and analysis.


Its actually even worse — its advertising for their product


Wasm can also call web apis directly. The overhead you hear about is in translating complex types like nested dicts etc between formats. But wasm runs inside the js runtime


There's a real overhead in that wasm can't inline those calls, but Javascript can


How serious was Eureka labs anyway? It seemed like essentially a banner for him messing around with content creation


people often found businesses to write off expensive purchases. my friend has a "company" which does nothing but he wrote off a $5000 MBP for this business expenses...


Get him audited.


As much as I’d like to share in the skepticism, the very beginning of the article states it very plainly — this is a step function.

Lots of people feel that Mythos is a psyops campaign, but I don’t really understand the skepticism. Most of it seems to stem from the general distrust of things that aren’t publicly available.

A few Anthropic employees have described Mythos as a general purpose model improvement, but that claim has yet to be widely backed up so that’s the only place I’m remaining skeptical.

For the domain of security research, I’m willing to buy the narrative.


In his interview on the Hard Fork podcast, Palo Alto Networks’ CEO described the capability change from Opus to Mythos being more about availability; evidently it runs in a very compute-intensive, always-on mode. Unclear if the base model is significantly different, but Arora ascribed the difference mostly to that change.


> As much as I’d like to share in the skepticism, the very beginning of the article states it very plainly — this is a step function.

To be fair, they can't say "You know, Mythos is better, but improvements are overhyped af". Moreover, their explanation of that "step change" is strange. It sounds like Mythos isn't that much better at finding vulnerabilities (which is very strange, given statements from Mozilla), but is way stronger at working with them.

> Lots of people feel that Mythos is a psyops campaign, but I don’t really understand the skepticism. Most of it seems to stem from the general distrust of things that aren’t publicly available.

1) Attempts to spin the idea about "Super powerful general purpose model that can't be released for some not so clear reasons" are usually a very bad sign. OpenAI proves it.

2) Mythos system card has a lot of strange moments, errors and things that sound like attempts to deceive.

3) It's strange that Anthropic is struggling with both Sonnet 5.0 and Opus 5.0, but at the same time has a breakthrough in the form of Mythos.

> A few Anthropic employees have described Mythos as a general purpose model improvement, but that claim has yet to be widely backed up so that’s the only place I’m remaining skeptical.

Article describes Mythos as a cybersecurity-specific model though. It's yet another unclear moment.


A general distrust of things that aren't publicly available is very healthy. We should all do more of that!

Honest question, do you buy the narrative of everyone trying to sell you a product?


> As much as I’d like to share in the skepticism, the very beginning of the article states it very plainly — this is a step function.

That's great and all, but nobody was being skeptical or asking anything about whether Mythos is or isn't a step function. Mythos could be a ten-dimensional ladder and it wouldn't change my question. The question wasn't about Mythos, but about Cloudflare: what did they found? That question is entirely fair and expected regardless of whether vulnerabilities are found via Mythos, the NSA, or a caveman.


Claiming something doesn't make it true.


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

Search: