Flash => HTML5 was a travesty for creative little games on the web. It never recovered. Even today the authoring tools are crap for the average person with an idea, if you ignore AI vibe coding for a minute, which overcomes the tooling deficiency by being experts at the difficult tooling. (But I guess Flash => HTML5 was only a part of it, the rise of IAP everything, which was also pioneered/popularized by Apple, may have played an equal or larger role in the demise of that game genre.)
So far Apple has been using default-checked checkbox during onboarding process for OS-level “help us improve…” diagnostics collection. Not sure about this specifically.
Hear me out: if they actually worry so much about the hypothetical of AI mass killing, maybe they should first do something concrete about the reality that their models are deployed right now to kill people in a certain war-torn region of the Earth.
This is more of a sound bite than a substantive argument. If someone is worried about AI killing _all_ humans, shouldn't they absolutely focus on that?
> If someone is worried about AI killing _all_ humans, shouldn't they absolutely focus on that?
This is more of a sound bite than a substantive argument because we can consider natural disease, biology research, aliens, climate, supernovae, asteroids and what not as threats to _all_ humans. Literally nothing is being done about any of these but AI can actually help with all of them.
On the other hand, "AI killing _all_ humans" is the least likely event compared to those listed above. Of course, of you build or operate a nuke plant the wrong way, or a car for that matter, disaster will follow, but AI is much easier to secure than a nuke plant or even a car - a lot easier. "A dangerous token generator" is just an extremely dumb attempt at deception.
Whether it’s intentional requires a legal investigation to establish. Since when is “hey we didn’t mean it!” in a corporate press release enough to establish lack of intent in a criminal matter?
It's pretty damn obvious to anyone who ever bothered to look at rtk gain output, no benchmark needed at all. Agent runs
rtk command-that-prints-100k-tokens | tail -5
costs 5 lines, maybe 100 tokens without rtk, but rtk will report 100k savings. Of course it doesn't know about that tail -5.
Worse, since rtk defaults to persisting that savings stat, it breaks sandboxing. Prefixing with rtk leads to random auto-mode denials from time to time too (this is independent of disabling savings stat persistence).
Honestly have no idea why anyone who knows the first thing about CLIs would take rtk gain seriously. I guess clueless vibe coders who has hardly ever worked in a terminal before will look at the stat and feel good about it?
That said, rtk is still mildly useful for compressing repeated test run outputs and stuff, but you should only ever use it on whitelisted commands; wrapping everything like they suggest you to do is just stupid.
Have you ever counted the number of times Claude fucked up quoting/escaping and had to issue a corrected tool call? Or get stuck in some tricky quoting situation for two minutes, throwing a couple piles of shit at the wall to see what sticks. IIRC I’ve even seen it eventually using the edit tool out of frustration once.
HN is notorious for armchair <insert-topic> experts for <insert-topic> you actually know, outside of software, computing/computing-adjacent electronic hardware and startups. “Fucking wild” “confidently incorrect nonsense” is likely the norm on most fringe topics, judging by the few I know about.
reply