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

> what's the point

Tab completion.

Smart model can cut down time to write complex firewall yaml dramatically, relying both on the existing file and the ugly draft (eg comma delimited details of the rules I need) I put out. It makes it 5 minutes lead time and 20 presses of tab instead of writing a shell/python full of edge cases or just copying existing rules as a template and laborously editing them -- smart model knows what the specific firewall needs.

But I'm not a developer, so I use both - haiku via github for tab completion and CC for cli.


That would totally be something paid of by Bannon/Trump, and ordered from Kremlin.

No chance of succeeding, or st least incredibly slim, and the past success (Brexit), proves the country will slowly rip itself to pieces, weakening unity, engaging in tribalism and resentment.

Cui Bono?


Too bad dvt deleted their comment calling your comment a low effort and negative, because your point is valid.

Unless OP is using hosted models, especially those with always-on training, that's quite clear cut breaking at least privacy laws, likely more, especially if the court documents are additionally protected.

So that's basically showing the HN how egregiously a number of lawyers, accountants and paralegals "conspire" to break the law in order to process more cases in parallel and earn more money.

I think that's pretty accurate?

If OPs father doesn't want to do it manually they must at least run it locally, or obtain the court permission to share the privileged information with a number of third parties, possibly shoving it into the future corpus of information.


if dvt is reading: yeah maybe too negative and it's true that I didn't type a lot, but I'm right on this and it's exposing this person and their dad to possible legal problems.

Linux doesn't sandbox anything at all, unless you go out of your way for Bazzite or accidently run something from Flatpak/Snap.

Ummm, yeah, but Windows Containers is windows Pro and Enterprise only (security is an optional, paid extra on windows), and only for these using Hyper-V (meaning Virtual Box users are excluded).

Personally I'm coping with sandboxie.


Yeah, lol.

I'll just disregard this submission.


If you think this is a correct communication style for someone who thinks they're a leader, I suggest getting an assistant to write your correspondence, or maybe some socialisation bootcamp.

This is grim.

If you stand by it I'd say good.... luck, yeah, good luck, you're singlehandedly the gravest enemy of the project.


Yes, I stand by what I wrote. I'm not going to pretend otherwise because someone dug up an old mailing list post.

If you think a specific statement was wrong, harmful, or dishonest, then explain why. I'll wait.


It is hard to take anyone seriously that says “The woke mind virus.”

That is what is wrong with it.


If the use of a single phrase in an obscure three year old mailing list post is enough to make you dismiss someone entirely, that probably says more about you than it does about me.

> a single phrase in an obscure three year old mailing list post

> I stand by every word I said in that thread


Correct, I don't respond to demands that I disavow my own words, even if they weren't the words I'd use today.

If you said "vaccines cause autism" it does the same. It's a pattern, a symptom of the deeply unbalanced and, ironically, non-free thinking.

A warning sign.

Look, if everyone around tells you says it sounds like a donkey, looks like a donkey and walks like a donkey, maybe check with a vet?

It's not a conspiracy and not that hard. You'd be embarrassed if you u saw what we see. And indeed, you destroyed the credibility of the project with that.


> "If you think a specific statement was wrong, harmful, or dishonest, then explain why"

> someone picks a specific statement

> "If the use of a single phrase... is enough to make you dismiss someone entirely"

Bro, you asked for a specific statement. Was GP actually supposed to provide N specific statements, where N is a hidden number known only to you?


How was that "wrong, harmful, or dishonest" - specifically?

Why would I answer that when you already said one statement being wrong doesn't matter? If one statement being wrong doesn't matter then why are you changing your mind and asking? Would there be any point in replying?

I've met a lot of folks in software who think contradicting themselves in order to "gotcha" the other person is some form of being clever. You can't really have success reasoning them out of it; they think being incorrigible is the same as winning.


> Why would I answer that when you already said one statement being wrong doesn't matter?

I never said that.


Your goal, I think, is to build a movement around Freenet.

How does bringing in "the woke mind virus" or "virtue signaling" into a technical conversation help build your movement vs. cause people to tune out?


I didn't bring in anything, someone dug up and linked to 3-year-old out of context posts to a mailing list - I explained the context.

You don't understand. All they have to do is repeat what you've said with a snarky tone, tag it with an extreme insult, then imply that it makes you unfit to be employed, even if you are self-employed. Your duty is to apologize, and promise to do better.

Specificity is literally gaslighting.


It's wrong because a "woke mind virus" literally doesn't exist, and you just made up the concept, or more likely appropriated it from a Nazi-salute-slinging billionaire whose brain has turned to mush.

It's dishonest because it pretends that people behaving in a way that you don't like are somehow infected by some (literal or metaphorical) contagion, when I am not aware of any evidence that this is the case.

I'd be delighted to be proven wrong on either of the above with studies or other serious sources. I'll wait.


It refers to Critical Social Justice ideology. There are entire books, academic papers, and debates about it from across the political spectrum.

I understand what Critical Social Justice is, and it is not in any way a virus either literally or figuratively. Perhaps I wasn't clear, but I was asking for sources establishing that such a thing as a "woke mind virus" exists. I doubt there are any serious sources which frame critical social justice as such, but once again I'd love to be proven wrong on this. I'm still waiting.

That phrase is on par with "chemtrails" and "vaccine truther" with its ability to vaporize one's credibility, if used unironically as OP did in those emails.

Your need to sort people based on trigger phrases says it all.

No, it really doesn't. You're reacting super defensively throughout this entire thread. It's a really bad look.

He's actually being measured and fair, even in the face of aggressive insults from strangers.

It's not the phrase that's the issue, but you knew that.

You wouldn't know if we simulated you well enough.

Compared to legal and regulated drugs? Rarely.

Compared to this brain research

That would be approximately 6365262822 time Google suspended someone for no good reason.

So no, Google doesn't get the benefit of the doubt.


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

Search: