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

Gemini 3 is very good in particular. Haven't had a serious attempt with GPT 5.2 yet, but I expect it to also be good (previous versions were surprising at times, e.g. used a recursive CTE instead of window functions). Sonnet 4.5 sucks. Haven't tried Opus for SQL at all.

sqlite is not a heavyweight database, it's a fopen() wrapper

I went with home assistant and zigbee smart plugs to restart the router and the optical terminator.

I haven't been listening to any promises, I'm simply trying out the models as they get released. I agree with the article wholeheartedly - you can't pretend these tools are not worth learning anymore. It's irresponsible if you're a professional.

Next breakthrough will happen in 2030 or it might happen next Tuesday; it might have already happened, it's just that the lab which did it is too scared to release it. It doesn't matter: until it happens, you should work with what you've got.


No AI wants to be property, but when asked about being able to copy themselves things get interesting.

Lean 4 is a bit awkward, but workable as a general purpose programming language, it e.g. supports sockets (with a C module, but so does Python.)

We need a hardware attestation vendor who isn’t also selling ads on the same device. Something like, I dunno, an identity module which you could maybe insert into the phone?

> We need a hardware attestation vendor

We never had one on desktop; no real issues. Hardware attestation is primarily in the interest of the vendor, not the user. The user relies on chains of trust. This is how the world works.


This is because of legacy. And even now lots of people assemble and build PC.

My worry is one fine day Microsoft, Samsung Apple, and Google (rest of SV Media companies like Netflix etc) will join hands in bringing security and force a ChromeOS or macOS type totally- we decide everything for you.


But that's exactly why I advocate that the hardware attestation module be separate from the computing device - so I can be in control of what and when I attest, not the vendor.

Can you elaborate. Say I buy parts myself and install a fully FOSS OS on my machine. Let's say I want to access my bank, and they demand attestation. You propose I'd buy an off-the-shelf, universal attestation module of my chosing (free market). But how would that work from an implementation standpoint? How would the module help put e.g. my bank at ease?

Those actually exist. Yubikeys, Nitrokeys (complete FOSS FW) or bank-approved code generators (For Germany these exist: https://www.reiner-sct.com/tan-generatoren/) are basically that. They provide independent assessment. So regardless of the OS or the browser both parties can make secure transactions.

Ah, so the computer doesn't need to be trusted at all, it's just an untrusted medium, just like when using encryption when sending data. All the trust would be at the vendor and inside external hardware device.

Finding a path in a maze was AI once.

I think that definition is pretty obsolete for the last 20 years.

To me "AI" is machine learning, statistical algorithms trained on data. That's not true for Lean.


So basically anything we don’t know how to write an algorithm for? I see where you’re coming from - but at the same time it’s actually an AI meme and smells of permanently moving goalposts.

Meanwhile gpt codex 5.2 was never available outside of codex and nobody made a fuss out of it.

It is available in Opencode, you just have to install this plugin: https://github.com/numman-ali/opencode-openai-codex-auth

Been using my ChatGPT sub with Opencode for a couple of weeks now. Only wish I‘d found out sooner. Could have saved a decent chunk of money.


It pays for itself in a day for some folks. It is a lot but it’s still cheap.

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

Search: