Someone1234

While they both fall under DHS, you're confusing CBP with ICE.

CBP's job is to protect the border and stop drug and people trafficking entering, whereas ICE's original purpose was to enforce immigration law within the US.

While not "everything" ICE was tasked with was immigration, that was their bread and butter. Where the vast majority of their workforce and spend went.

But why is ICE, specifically, investigating that? The Federal government has multiple criminal divisions - why are ICE now a US Citizen criminal investigatory branch too? Seems far outside of their remit.

Commonly that isn't a software issue though, that's a hardware problem being [correctly] indicated by software. With three notable exceptions:

- Windows 1.0 through ME era: Legitimately an unstable OS due to dangerous memory model/lack of memory isolation.

- Windows NT through XP: Before KPP was added, software was monkey-patching the kernel, and it was causing instability (particularly multiple trying to over-patch each other). For example during that era it wasn't UNCOMMON for antivirus to do so as a matter of course.

- Windows Vista Specific: They made significant changes to the driver model of several popular device types, and manufacturers weren't ready. So a lot of driver-related failures.

But since then, it has mostly be smooth sailing. If you see a BSOD, you can trace it down, and more often than not the source will be underlying hardware failure which is why BSOD exists and isn't a software bug or problem.

That's definitely a problem too.

But minor credit to Anthropic, at least they've mostly stuck to their four model names (Haiku, Sonnet, Opus, and Fable). You mostly know where a model is MEANT to be positioned from the name alone. OpenAI cannot keep it consistent from release to release.

But, yes, currently Opus Vs. Fable has the same issue as Sol-6.1 Vs. Astra.

I'm very confused about their model market position/naming schema.

First we had:

> Luna (Small), Terra (Medium), Sol (Big).

Which was fairly smooth after you got used to their planets.

But then they added Astra as the "Bigger," which was mostly still self-coherent:

> Luna (Small), Terra (Medium), Sol (Big), Astra (Bigger)

But then things go confusing, they released Sol-6.1 which sometimes is superior to Astra, and discontinued Terra which made it look like this:

> Luna (Small), Sol-6.1 == Astra

But with Sol-6.1 costing the old Terra-6.0 price, while, as I said performing as good as the old "Bigger" model in many non-3D/UI situations.

Now they're re-introduced Terra, as a 6.1 release, making this even more confusing.

Did Microsoft's chief branding officer move over to OpenAI?

Cloudflare has automatic exploit mitigation. Which I feel like would somewhat defeat the point.

It is Schrodinger's Bob - Both technically literate enough to know how to do that, while also not being technically literate enough to spot the phish or determine why autofill isn't working/the password manager isn't matching.

This is where Passkeys shine, in an edge-case user that is neither of the two most common user types. Basically a unicorn situation.

So they do, in fact, do that and you have a workaround? They won't autofill on a phishing site, thus the copy/paste bypass.

It is a pretty big red-flag.

> There is nothing to prevent you from entering your super secure u quiet password on the wrong site if you get phished.

You replied to someone talking about password managers, which objectively do exactly that.

> Unique strong passwords, TOTP, 2FA, one time sign in emails, none of those offer this stuff.

And Passkeys don't offer portability, user choice, or user control.

Cryptography may be a solution, passkeys are one technical implementation that at is core is designed around smartphone-first, vendor-first, brand-loyality-first thinking.

Solar is great. I'm highly skeptical that a battery + inverter (w/o solar), using time-of-use for payback would ever make pure financial sense.

In fact, if it DID make financial sense, wouldn't companies already be buying up empty/cheap space and then turning a profit after the payback period? Why aren't they?

There are other reasons to do this, but purely on the financial side, I'd want to see the numbers on this one. Again, this isn't about solar, the claim was about battery + inverter + time-of-use paying for itself.

The LLM should have suggested where you find the browser setting to disable it - they all have one. Can you explain why you're leaving the setting enabled, and using a user-script to disable it instead? Most browsers even offer per-site permissions.

Can you explain your thinking?

Flock, at the core, isn't a public entity. They aren't a government. So they're a private entity, just like an individual, tracking who they want, when they want.

This person is doing the exact same thing as Flock, and suddenly it is a problem? Seems like a double-standard.

So the expected flow of this is:

- Scroll

- Read either the left OR right (but we're going to switch)

- Mouse-over 3D shapes(???) to actually read percentages

- Click "Dig Deeper" to see the most useful part of the survey which is a slide-in only taking up 2/3 of the screen...

- Most of the "deep dive" page though is niche exporting tools instead of, you know, content.

- Then there are sub-pages that seemingly have more data, but I have to click "Dig Deeper" -> Subpage -> Full Data over and over again?

- No navigational anchors, no real layout overview of this thing...

Like this whole thing should win all the awards for one of the worst and most hostile visual designs I've seen. It should genuinely be taught in web-development classes because it so well represents all the antipatterns of UI, UX, navigation, and data presentation. Honestly, the only antipattern they managed NOT to shove in here is scrolljacking.

I gave up trying to read it after about my third trip through the rabbit hole of trying to see a data area. And, I know, site layout/design should NOT be on-topic for this. But it is actually a legitimate blocker in this case, people aren't going to read this because of how horrible this is.

I'd blame AI, but both Codex and Claude produce better experiences than this today.

I understand your point; but I disagree - Unlimited is possible.

It gets into a "define unlimited" discussion. You could give "unlimited" usage, but still "limit" both concurrency and throttle speed. Even if you run 24/7, they still have knobs they can twist.

Have they solved GPT5.6 SOL's propensity to over-engineer and over-complicate? You'd ask SOL to do something relatively simple, and find four single-use methods, an interface, and a factory-factory.

I actually preferred 5.6-Terra not because it is technically superior (it isn't) but because it had better instincts to NOT do this stuff.

PS - Speaking of better instincts, have they closed the UI-design gap at all? I keep a Claude subscription just because /design produces significantly higher quality UI design/UI feedback/UI refinement than anything I've seen from OpenAI.

You forgot to include whatever you're proposing instead.

"Trust me bro, Astra is better" isn't perhaps as useful as you seem to believe. I'm not even saying it is right or wrong, just that my opinion on this topic is still just one additional subjective data-point.

Only thing I wish with these benchmarks is that they would run repeat tests every couple of months. Then re-rank based on that too. We've seen a lot of performance fall-off after a couple of weeks with new releases.

For people with any kind of budget, Opus 5.5's [Medium] actually can make sense dollar per intelligence/dollar per task wise. Heck, it puts some other models to shame. [Max]'s cost is completely unhinged.

My most exciting recent release is actually 5.6 Luna, not because it is the best on any index, but the dollar per work is insane value for money. I find myself more exciting by "value" than hypothetical ceilings because I'm just not in that budget category.

I cannot tell if this is a reference to RAD in the 90s or LLMs today, and I think that kind of shows my point.

I'm going to age myself real-bad here, but I remember back when RAD ("Rapid Application Development") was the hotness of the 90s. Microsoft Access, Visual Basic (6), and even web-development itself (e.g. PHP/Wordpress).

People today likely cannot relate, but a big concern back then was identical: If the non-tech users can write their own code/and or code is easier to write, why even learn to be a programmer? What's the point?

It seems absurd now but legitimately it was exactly the same stuff. Like then, programmers will fall into two camps, those that keep up and those that fall behind. The thing with LLMs (and agentic) is that it doesn't change WHAT we do but rather HOW we do it.

So will programmers exist in the early 2000s after RAD? Well turns out, yes, and in expanded numbers. Businesses just expected more from technology, and the personnel gap never really closed. With LLMs the same will likely happen - same number of people, higher expectation.

The limit on how many programmers they'd hire was never "wants." They always wanted more than they could get. The limit was budgets/money. Now more "wants" can be fulfilled (just like post-RAD/web), but the budgets are more or less similar.

PS - Although it should be noted that the economy is not in a good place currently, and we're seeing an unusual employment environment. A lot of which "AI" is blamed on, least of all because companies can save face that way.

I flagged this and wanted to explain my reasoning.

At the time of writing, the article states something that its own link doesn't support (i.e. it is inaccurate). CBP hasn't "suspended all personal prescription importation." What they've done is removed De Minimis Exemption (i.e. duty free below $800), and that's it. Meaning you can still important personal medication before and after Oct 22nd, what has changed is that now it is subject to normal duty.

Do I think this is bad for people importing personal medication? Absolutely I do, and I oppose it. However, I don't think misstating the argument is constructive nor warranted. You could make the argument using the facts on the ground, and then re-state that in the thread title.

So the story is worthy of discussion, and interesting (even the personal medication POV). But this link and this title aren't "it." Hopefully we can get a higher quality source and title on this topic.

You aren't arguing a "contrary" to what I actually wrote above. You're arguing with a strawman Redditor, and a point adjacent to what I was posting about - experts responding to topics within their actual realm of expertise.

So I won't be addressing this, for those reasons and others.

This is commonly why, on Reddit in particular, you can get eaten alive.

Someone confident but incorrect, can often sound more convincing than someone with actual expertise. The expert must add caveats/hedge, because those are the facts on the ground, whereas the person reciting google can be entirely confident.

Of course the people judging aren't experts, so they side with confidence and simplicity. Heck, just writing shorter replies on Reddit is rewarded. Nobody reads the articles, let alone a paragraph-long reply.

That all being said though, there are limits. Sometimes LLMs on high-thinking go off on full tangents based on little, and don't have the self-awareness to bring it back.

I've been using it for several months since the developer beta came out; overall I'm extremely positive on it. One of their better releases that seemingly focused more on quality and refinements than new-features.

Siri is definitely worth using now, even if it remains still a work-in-progress/needs continued refinement. It can surprise you in good ways, but it isn't consistently good yet.

The keyboard remains unfixed, as is tradition. The same issues they've "fixed" like three or four releases now, seemingly are identically broken, and I'm lost faith they CAN fix it.

The iOS Keyboard and Search on Windows, are like the perpetually broken things that both companies have "fixed" every year for the last ten+ years and yet... It is almost farcical as this point.

Yeah; plus we know they're designing with potential future local-only Vs. hybrid Vs. cloud-only in mind depending on hardware/market changes. So having it be this flexible buys them a ton of future potential.

People have speculated that with FPGAs or even an ASIC you could take some smaller models we have today, turn the chip into essentially that model-as-hardware, and get some really compelling performance/power-usage characteristics.

At that point running a GOOD quantized Q8 model on a phone is not beyond the realm.

> It's worse for the technician in this case, because he really was being followed --- that's not unlawful but it's unnerving.

Isn't that exactly what Flock are doing to tens of thousands of people a day? So why the double-standard.

I actually agree it is unnerving, I just don't agree that one should be held to a different standard than the other.

It actually looks really nice; and I'd consider myself their target demographic conceptually. My last iPhone was a Pro for context.

But at a $2K starting price, plus likely another $200 for the storage size they really expect people to purchase, in this economy, it is so far outside of my price range it is dead to me.

Which is to say: Cool tech, but I've already dismissed it as something I want evaluate for my next phone just based on price alone.

That's maybe the real death-nail for folding phones: Price hasn't yet shifted to allow them to be mass market rather than enthusiast phones.

I've found that if you attach any pictures at all: rejected.

So what I've taken to doing is adding the business without photos (almost always accepted), and then trying to attach the photos later after that goes live (mostly works). But I agree, their process is completely broken, and I doubt they have any incentive to fix it.

I'm legitimately out of the loop; what is going on/broken with Opus 5?

One thing I've noticed and HATE, is that when you increase thinking-effort, that seemingly increases response-length. Meaning that X.High is longer than High, which is longer than Medium, etc.

Which is kind of the inverse of how people work; a really smart person can condense difficult ideas into simple[r] terms. Whereas people who struggle speak a lot but say very little.

High/X.High do seem to deliver better quality results, but it sometimes feels like needle-in-haystack extracting that from the word vomit.

I agree that the marketing copy on Claude's site remain misleading.

You really need to dive into the FAQ or help pages to understand what "20x" means. In particular the very first thing they show you is "Choose 5x or 20x more usage than Pro*" without specifying 5-hour window/session window.

Contrast that with what they bury under the fold in the FAQ:

> You get everything in Pro, plus more usage: choose from 5x or 20x the usage of Pro per 5-hour session.

Much clearer. Plus nowhere on the site that I am able to locate do they compare weekly limits for Pro, Max 5x, and Max 20x. Which I don't love - getting more weekly usage is a big deal.

I have no idea if the lawsuit will go anywhere, but regardless Anthropic need to do better. Both in the summary and in the comparison table, clearly distinguish 5-hour window limit differences from weekly total usage limit differences.