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

No. Absolutely not. The opposite in fact. Your bash script is deterministic. You can send it to 20 AIs or have someone fluent read it. Then you can be confident it’s safe.

An LLM will run the probabilistically likely command each time. This is like using Excel’s ridiculous feature to have a cell be populated by copilot rather than having the AI generate a deterministic formula.


There was a coffee shop ages ago in SF that would every few hours play a cacophony (e.g. multiple songs at once). I assume it was to drive away people camping on their laptops to rotate tables. Understand but super annoying to people like me who had a timer to but food or drink no less than hourly to be a good citizen

It's maybe best not to give too much context to this, except just to warn you to turn down the volume and not watch if you might suffer from epilepsy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJT8vfraCmk

When this was first presented, I was watching this in a large dark hall with this on the projector and the sound level set to extremely loud. Like a fool, I sat through this to the end wondering whether it was going to ever end rather than recognising it as a glorious troll.


That's extremely annoying. I have a Bluetooth speaker that I was intending to repurpose into a device to combat inconsiderate smart phone usage. I connected it to my laptop and started playing multiple streams of Punjabi MC - Beware of the Boys. It was torturous.

My other idea was to get the line from dumb and dumber "Do you want to hear the most annoying sound in the world..." And just loop the sound continuously.

I might just try this project though and see how it goes.


We had a friend who would play Metal when the ice cream store he worked at was closed but the customers were lingering too long. It generally worked, as he was immune.

I introduced my local restaurant owner to Mongolian Techno and the late night bar flies and some of the kitchen staff have never forgiven me. He won't admit if he plays it for himself, or because of them :)


It's 3am and we're arguing some insipid minutae over technically illegal tequila shots while one drunk girl is breaking it down on the tiny dance floor :)

this is awesome!

In Japan it's pretty much an institution that shops play an instrumental version of Hotaru no Hikari (which is basically Auld Lang Syne with different lyrics) when they're closing.

Most Japanese know it as "the closing song"


We did this where I bartended as well. Generally 15-20 minutes after serving the last drink of the night.

The goal wasn’t to offend or clear out 100% of the customers - just make a large enough portion decide that outside might be more comfortable/conducive than inside. The 20 or so customers who were fine with the cacophony were easy enough to wrangle manually, and also generally either people we knew well .


A live music venue near me plays this when it's time for people to GTFO:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Tiz6INF7I


I was at a coffee shop once that was playing metal while my writing group was meeting there and I just thought they had excellent taste (it was not near closing time)

I play disco music to keep the kids off my lawn.

Carissa's Wierd used to put cacophony at the end of some of their songs to clear the house out as well

Google had achieved carbon neutrality and committed to wiping out their carbon legacy until AI.


As a user I suffer from not being able to freely use or derive my own work from Microsoft’s


This. People conflate consumer to user. A user in the sense of GPL is a programmer or technical person whom the software (including source) is intended for.

Not necessarily a “user of an app” but a user of this “suite of source code”.


Except really the whole point is it explicitly and actively makes no distinction. Every random user has 100% of the same rights as any developer or vendor.


A completely level playing field. There's probably never been a more perfect free market than that in free software.

It turns out that most people who say that value free market capitalism never really did.


At this point they've contributed a reasonably-fair share of open-source code themselves.

No one benefits from locking up 99.999% of all source code, including most of Microsoft's proprietary code and all GPL code.

No one.

When it comes to AI, the only foreseeable outcome to copyright maximalism is that humans will have to waste their time writing the same old shit, over and over, forever less one day [1], because muh copyright!!!1!

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act


> only foreseeable outcome to copyright maximalism

Nahh, AI companies had plenty of money to pay for access they simply chose not to.


Clearing those rights, which don't actually exist yet, would have been utterly impossible for any amount of money. Thousands of lawyers would tie up the process in red tape until the end of time.


The basic premise of the economy is people do stuff for money. Any rights holder debating with their punishing house or whatever just means they don’t get paid. Some trivial number of people would opt out, but most authors or their estates would happily take an extra few hundred dollars per book.

YouTube on the other hand has permission from everyone uploading videos to make derivative works barring some specific deal with a movie studio etc.

Now there’s a few exceptions like large GPL works but again diminishing returns here, you don’t need to train on literally everything.


Nice. I didn’t know I can now replace my “assertExhaustive” function.

Previously you could define a function that accepted never and throws. It tells the compiler that you expect the code path to be exhaustive and fixes any return value expected errors. If the type is changed so that it’s no longer exhaustive it will fail to compile and (still better than satisfies) if an invalid value is passed at runtime it will throw.


I thought the same thing. I also have an assert function I pull in everywhere, and this trick seemed like it would be cleaner (especially for one-off scripts to reduce deps).

But unfortunately, using a default clause creates a branching condition that then treats the entire switch block as non-exhaustive, even though it is technically exhaustive over the switch target. It still requires something like throwing an exception, which at that point you might as well do 'const x: never = myFoo'.


I still keep my assertNever function because it will handle non-exhaustiveness at runtime.


Is this meant to be a defense of the DNS protocol? I’ve never assumed the meme was that the DNS protocol is flawed, but that these changes are particularly sensitive/dangerous.

At Google we noticed the main cause of outages are config changes. Does that mean external config is dangerous? Of course not! But it does remind you to be vigilant


Mongo also has a good query language and a mongo DB can be seen as an array of documents


It sounds like you’re not at the scale where cloud storage is obviously useful. By the time you definitely need S3/GCS you have problems making sure files are accessible everywhere. “Grep” is a ludicrous proposition against large blob stores


Maybe they’re not using keepalives in their clients causing thousands of handshakes per second?


Yes, they mention this as a 'fix' for connection-related memory usage:

> Disable keep-alive: close the connection immediately after each upload completes.

Very odd idea.


Possibly missing session resumption support compounding the problem.


Doubt that’s on the table unless Microsoft is also sued. Without a joint ruling this wouldn’t be balanced


Doesn't mean we

a) can't hope

b) shouldn't hope


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

Search: