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

And also great reasons for Bun to port themselves elsewhere. If they aren’t allowed to contribute to Zig, there’s very little reason to select Zig moving forward.

How does any of that impact a user who just has a specific task they want to accomplish and who doesn't have a CS degree?

Is it "their" software? Sure, if it meets their needs. What if the AI changes? Who cares, I already have the software. All the what ifs are solved by taking the current code, stuffing into into any AI you like today, and getting the new version.

As a user, this all sounds like a great deal. Devs can continue wringing their hands over code quality and long term support and architecture and preferred framework, meanwhile the user who had an itch got it scratched and didn't need nor care about any of those things.


> What if the AI changes? Who cares, I already have the software. All the what ifs are solved by taking the current code, stuffing into into any AI you like today, and getting the new version.

It's just dismissing the question. If the AI changes, just use one that didn't change. If it gets 1000x more expensive, just use one that remains cheap.

Apart from the fact that without new input to learn from, things will probably stagnate in new exciting ways, on top of the stagnation, bloat and slop we worked so hard to make a culture over the last decades.

> Devs can continue wringing their hands over code quality and long term support and architecture and preferred framework

I mentioned none of those things.

> the user who had an itch got it scratched and didn't need nor care about any of those things.

And I don't care about that user when it comes to the question of my agency and autonomy. It's like people discussing how to make cats do tricks and someone going "just get a dog".


Most USB C cables do have a label, but it's an electronic one. Desktop and mobile OSes could do a better job of surfacing this information for the user.

Or they could simply be labelled.

In this way, I would be able to see (using the advanced, integrated bionic vision system that I've carried with me and used every day I've been alive) what it is that I have before me instead of plugging them in one at a time to some electronic oracle to try to discern the details of the invisible magic inside.


Do they really? Even on linux, I can look at what bandwidth a device is connected with using lsusb, but there is no way to tell if a low speed is a limitation of the device or the cable. It just displays the speed that was negotiated considering all factors. I've never found a way to get information about a cable digitally.

There are a handful of dedicated devices that will read the eMarker, eg https://www.amazon.com/s?k=USB+emarker

A recent HN thread announcing a Mac app that can read them along with discussion on alternatives: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47972511


Very cool, thanks!

Noctua is awesome in a lot of ways, one of them is offering full CAD models: https://www.noctua.at/en/3d-cad-models

One of the first things mentioned on that page is:

> To protect our intellectual property, certain features – such as fan impeller geometries – have been slightly modified while remaining visually very close to the actual product.

So you do have to 3d scan them yourself if you're trying to print a copy.


My guess, the article itself is clearly AI authored and there are a fair number of us who don't particularly like the writing style. Further, it implies something about the original human's own valuation of this work - if they decided to let the machine handle it, why should I spend my own time reading what they didn't bother to write?

I don't like AI slop either, but we're both non-natives, so we did a run of AI after initial draft for the reader's comfort. We'll try to improve on the style

I think it's more prosaic, OSS is great for building a userbase but not great at generating revenue. So just wave the OSS flag while you build a userbase, then pull out whichever flimsy excuse seems workable at the time when you want to start step two of your enshittification plan.

The only thing new here is the excuse.


The site has been on life support for a decade, ownership has changed hands a few times, basic features promised 10 years ago never shipped, API is half implemented (eg. you can download an order but you cannot mark it shipped), and they still have no mechanism to collect state sales tax nor will they submit a 1090 as required by US tax law. I jumped ship 5 years ago when this became too much of a problem and not a single thing has changed in those 5 years.

Tindie was a great place for a hacker to sell a few widgets back in the day, but legal requirements have changed since then but Tindie has not changed a line of code in at least 10 years.


Where are you selling from now?

etsy, mostly for lack of a better option and a lack of desire to self host, deal with taxes, etc.

The key difference is that "swarms of inexpensive drones" can be made in "swarms of normal looking residential garages". The entire enterprise can be decentralized making it much tougher to target with strategic weapons.


Tried to download and Defender blocks it.


That's how the exploit works.


I can't seem to find any system files replaced, and the .exe was never executed. I'm running this in a test VM, but from what I can see, Defender signatures have been updated to block this prior to execution.

The exploit, from my reading, needs to be executed in order to do it's thing, but Defender isn't allowing it to be written to the filesystem on download.


What is Defender marking it as? I also wonder if they are just special casing this program and it would work again if the code was shuffled a bit or if it used the AMSI sig [0] instead of EICAR or if they actually fixed the problem.

[0] https://github.com/Roadmvn/C-Full-Offensive-Course/blob/main...


Detected: Program:Win32/Wacapew.C!ml

With a link to: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/wdsi/threats/malware-encyclo...


So who is at fault in your solution, the org who created and shipped the software bug, or the company that discovered it?

I don't see how OpenAI is Ford in your analogy as OpenAI didn't make the software that blew up.


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

Search: