fractorial
fractorial on Hacker News
From TFA:
> Note that disabling MPTCP on a program-by-program basis is a fragile mitigation. Accidentally leaving a single MPTCP listener exposed will still leave a system vulnerable. Further, it assumes that all viable exploits for this bug depend on MPTCP. Again, we strongly recommend upgrading to a patched kernel version
As someone who rolled and daily drives a harness leaner than Pi, there’s still a use case for both.
Similarly to “one language is best,” saying “one harness is best” is shortsighted in the best possible case.
That being said, Claude Code is bloatware.
Seeing Atlanna inspire an open weight model was not on my 2026 bingo card.
Seriously hope you get that trace because as much as I like to dunk on Claude Code as a harness, it’s definitely not as bad as OP stated, ha.
Would be cool to see a not slop version of this.
> Downstream runtimes that ship their own trust stores (Go, Node.js, Electron, Python certifi, curl, etc.)
At least two of these don’t ship a trust store.
Works every time 97% of the time.
Ah, yes that seems to be what URGENT track self-documents as.
What about it makes it so interesting?
If you had watched Grant for years, like I have, you would surely see how this is misinformation at best.
Curious: What are the trivial agent vs. human detection mechanisms?
How is Anthropic different? You still cannot use a subscription in a custom harness in the same way Codex allows you to.
And, no, wrapping claude -p or any other “allowed” use wherein you don’t control the agent loop isn’t the same.
I am in the process of open sourcing it! Unfortunately, my employer requires a (hopefully) cursory legal review.
I’ve rolled my own harness in Go. I have a rule to not let the production LoC exceed 50k lines. It is _very_ nice for my use cases. DeepSeek Flash V4.1 often performs at the level of GPT 5.6 Sol for non-orchestration tasks (programming and maths).
I add features and tweak it all the time: You just need to get comfortable with spending 3 hours in a chat session every 3 weeks to think hard about how to simplify whatever slop you didn’t simplify the last time you did this :)
As a programmer, maths researcher, and painter, there’s certainly something satisfying (to me) when an artistically symmetrical piece observes no mathematical symmetry: The very asymmetry in the language used to describe it is, in and of itself, beautiful.
Only under gross negligence would it be unprovable: Did you use a model whose training set included user data? Did the transcripts of any of the agents include a tool call whose result including user data?
I’m impressed you had the patience to even make it that far!
Brilliant. Precisely the reason I stopped using Anthropic's products.
Sir, I think you are lost.
> Because Codex without codex is fantastic.
Seriously: I roll my own harness over OpenRouter and GPT 5.6, and it is genuinely better than CC+Fable for my maths and programming use cases.
The one thing Fable 5.1 still tops out on is the ability to take a simple "Let's engage in an interactive complexity-removing session" and materialize abstractions and semantics quickly.
`pathological` is being used here in the security context: For example, _a parser contains a vulnerability when pathological inputs cause a program to crash._
How does a _multi-trillion dollar company_ think this is good presentation?
This is ludicrous; also, why publicly admit that blatant violation of ToS?
Roll your own harness or use an open source harness with a Codex subscription.
I maintain a Claude subscription for Fable but seldom use it.
Damn, what an epic library name.
Palomar requires the Comparator/formalization.yaml challenge stack. It also has an LLM-based vacuity gate backed by Tao.
Theoremdb is just a slop farm.
To be clear, I am deep into auto-research, but hooking up slop to slop is just unlikely to produce anything valuable.
Value is in how maths is communicated: The process, frustrations, triumphs, etc.
We have to able to take generated formalizations from “it compiles” to “it is correct” before crystallizing them.
Irrespective of opinions about a project or its authors, disclosing a potential security issue in a public forum is markedly not responsible disclosure.
This is, plainly stated, awesome.