I don't think it's about becoming copyright zealot. What angers me in there is the blatant inequality.
People are in jail or got heavy fines for opening torrent or steaming sites. But "Open"AI and others got a free pass because they're big corps.
How did they get a free pass? From the court decisions I have read they were held liable for downloading pirate copies and paid large fines for it. That might have been Meta, not OAI, though, but the point is the same.
I didn't know about the fines and can't find a lot of details online. It seems meta got fined for something else, but it was about 1B, which is less than 1% of their revenue.
I think the smaller companies or individual which did stuff like that got their life ruined. The pirate bay admin got fined multiple millions of dollars.
So if I agree it's not a "free pass", it's still a cheap pass many others didn't get.
Makes me realize how, as mentioned by other comments, copyright laws are a tool for the powerful to oppress others rather than an actual universal right.
A fine is a slap on and wrist. Imagine you individually copied and sold libgen. Not only that, you’d say you did it for profit, you knew it was illegal, and conspired with others to cover it up. I don’t understand why no criminal charges are filed? Why isn’t anyone going to prison for a crime committed?
Your claim "Imagine you individually copied and sold libgen" doesn't hold up because there are two parts, copying and selling. Copyright law considers the copying part to be a small civil offense punishable by a fine. It's the selling part that is much more highly illegal and can result in criminal punishment. OpenAI only did the copying part.
Honestly I don’t give a damn about copyright. I’m baffled by the double standards. Aaron Swartz was put away for so, so so much less than the massive amount of criminal activity we’re seeing here. They’re conspiring to break the law, openly, even jokingly. They’re hacking people, they’re stealing from people, openly. If no one is going to put a stop to it we might as well declare the legal system failed in its entirety.
Swartz was put away by aggressive over prosecution and it was a complete disservice of justice. We should be upset at the double standard, to the extent that we should be angry the people who prosecuted him haven't been punished for their miscarriage of justice. We should not be annoyed that we're now treating the "crime" of copyright infringement the way it should have been treated then.
Coding with plan mode is still vibe coding. No-one outside HN calls it things like "agentic engineering" or whatever. Everyone just says they are vibe coding regardless of how hands on they are.
Whether you use plan mode or not is orthogonal to whether or not you're vibe coding. "Vibe coding" means that you don't read or edit the code; you are running the software and iterating on vibes alone. That's the meaning since the original (and very recent!) coinage and hasn't changed.
If you're reading and editing the code, you're not vibe coding. If you're not reading and editing the code, you're probably vibe coding even if you feel "hands on".
I trust a modern model implementing a standard feature like this much more than 99% of the people I've worked with.
People bash LLMs for overengineering but for this it's what you want. Taking extreme edge-cases into account that a human would never bother with and obsessing over security.
I mostly vibe coded a queuing system to replace something we’re using at work (last week. Spent about $1500). Then I meticulously went through the code.
It was much harder to review because it was ultra defensive and included guards for tons of edge cases that weren’t possible.
Unnecessary abstractions for possible extension later. Useless indirection. Probably 3x as much code as there would have been if I’d written it by hand.
I didn’t one shot this. I kept a pretty tight leash on the AI. I had probably a dozen markdown files with of plans that I created over hours of back and forth with the AI and reviewed before each implementation round. I had automated reviews and quality gates etc…
What I found in review was that it was full of very subtle bugs that would have bitten hard in prod. Committing offsets asynchronously that would lead to dropped messages. Clock drift bugs that would lead to dropped messages or write amplification storms. Lack of back pressure in some stages of the pipeline that would cause notes to get silently OOM killed. Weird over-insistence on never crashing in most places that would mask systemic errors.
If I’d just shipped it without review, it would have mostly worked. But at the scale it’s going to be used (tens of thousands of messages per second) it would have caused production issues for months while we tracked down each of these issues.
> included guards for tons of edge cases that weren’t possible
It's not possible until it is. This is the justification lazy developers like we all are have been using leading to bugs down the road. This glorification of hand-made code is strange, like we weren't writing dirty code full of shortcuts and hacks all the time.
The issue with LLM guarding isn't that it's "excessive" in outputting edge case handling, it's that the result often ends up just suppressing an error that actually indicates there is a bug or that should be handled elsewhere in a different way.
While I've definitely experienced it I don't think this is as much of a problem anymore. It's very easy to add an instruction to projects where you want every error to lead to a top-level throw rather than be handled. I also find that when it does try to mitigate it does so gracefully with a path you would actually make if you had infinite time, but your instinct tells you it's overkill.
I remember a notable triangular sandwich packed in a cardboard box and sold on the motorway in France. I ate it while my jet lagged toddler cried and cried and we tried to get to Provence before nightfall.
There is something truly rotten about service station sandwiches in France. I once had a croque monsieur that was so execrable it made the paper bag appetising by comparison.
I don't know, Sandwiches of History has some real stinkers every now and then, such as the Cheese and Banana Sandwich, the Clam and Cheese Sandwich, or the Peanut-Butter Sandwich.
> So many tasty things people miss out on due to peer pressure and being afraid to give "strange" food a try.
I agree with the sentiment, but there's probably also a cultural thing. I love root beer, for instance, but from what I understand, many (most?) Europeans who've tried it think it's disgusting and tastes like medicine.
The thing I find fascinating about the root beer thing is that I don't recall root beer being an acquired taste. Like, I remember cola being a acquired taste, and Dr. Pepper being an acquired taste, but root beer, best I can recall, I enjoyed right off the bat. Same with most North Americans I know. And yeah, my overseas cousins find the stuff foul.
Yes there is. There are a lot people have no idea what makes a good sandwich. They will happily put turkey, Miracle Whip, and two Kraft singles on 11-grain honey wheat Wonderbread and go about their day fully convinced that they made something delicious and healthy.
The fact that >50% of Italian sub shops default to not putting onions on their torpedoes is a testament to how far we've fallen as a culture.
These aren't preferences so much as they are facts. I am very much not messing around. You can tell how serious I am by how I equated the decline of western civilization to a lack of sandwich vegetables.
There's plenty of tasty things that don't involve condiments.
It's generally American food that has a lot of mustard, mayonnaise, ketchup, ect. Surprisingly, when I travel I don't need to be as careful. Most other cultures avoid strong flavors / textures like that.
What cultures are you referring to? Mayonnaise and mustard are staples in for example French cuisine, which many consider to be the best food in the world.
Why are carpenters always the example in these arguments? I know a framing carpenter and I've never heard anyone whine more about their job than he does.
Construction was never the best metaphor for programming. The compiler constructs the code. Software dev is closer to building architecture than construction.
What was edgy about asking someone to read a Thomas Pynchon essay on the word Luddite? Id argue their weird comment about people who don't like AI being luddites is more annoying and discriminatory.
AI maxxers know they're doing harm to themselves by overusing llms. The way they react so defensively when you point it out to them lets you know its real. Everyone wants to pretending like they have superpowers and are evolving into "100x" engineers, but in reality they're devolving.
reply