gejose
Surely you understand why they wouldn't want to publicize a PoC, right?
"~70% of the vulnerabilities Microsoft assigns a CVE each year continue to be memory safety issues" - Microsoft [1]
"We adopted Rust for its security and are seeing a 1000x reduction in memory safety vulnerability density compared to Android’s C and C++ code." - Google on Android [2]
This is also worth looking: https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/memory-safet...
References: 1. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/msrc/blog/2019/07/a-proactiv... 2. https://blog.google/security/rust-in-android-move-fast-fix-t...
> Yes to start out it’s 95% booleans. But then you want a rollout. And then you want some targeting rules. And then you want non booleans… maybe some json. Oo wouldn’t it be nice if the json could conform to a schema… and then eventually you are like damn I really want to change these without deploying. Or you want to read the same flag from multiple services.
This has not been my experience. I see it generating walls of text with very little SNR.
Ultimately I decided to get rid of KOReader because it felt a bit laggy. The gestures (eg: swiping up on the left side to increase frontlight brightness) didn't work well either.
I eneded up writing my own software to sync progress from Kobo to a KOReader Sync server[2] which my Readest app also connects to (love that unlike the Kindle, the Kobo is quite an open system). You can even set it up so you can SSH into it[3].
[1] https://github.com/readest/readest [2] https://github.com/koreader/koreader-sync-server [3] https://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=254214
Here are some feature I wish existed in Obsidian without any plugins:
* Dataview [1] (this is now solved with Bases, so I really appreciate that)
* Folder Note [2] (I, and I assume many others come from Notion, and I wish this were a thing)
* Recent files [3]
* A built in calendar [4]
* Link embeds [5] (or something to store previews for pasted links)
* Waypoint [6], or something to create a table of contents
These are just things I wish existed, but whether or not these are 'basic' can be debated. Ultimately I do wish there were a robust permission system for plugins so that personal functionality gaps can be plugged, but without compromising safety.
References: [1] https://blacksmithgu.github.io/obsidian-dataview/ [2] https://github.com/xpgo/obsidian-folder-note-plugin [3] https://github.com/tgrosinger/recent-files-obsidian [4] https://github.com/liamcain/obsidian-calendar-plugin [5] https://github.com/Seraphli/obsidian-link-embed [6] https://github.com/IdreesInc/Waypoint
I really do think Obsidian needs 2 things to have any reasonable security:
1. It needs to be a lot more batteries-included. A user shouldn't need a plugin for basic functionality.
2. It needs a granular permission system, where each plugin should have to declare and prompt you to allow or reject specific permissions, just like on iOS and Android. The system should enforce that a plugin cannot bypass this.
I don't know how this is even remotely close to acceptable.
Care to provide some examples of this? This hasn't been my experience, in general.
I tried the yabai + skhd recently, but I didn't like that I had to disable System Integrity Protection.
Well structured redux (or mobx or zustand for that matter) can be highly maintainable & performant, in comparison to a codebase with poorly thought out useState calls littered everywhere and deep levels of prop drilling.
Redux Toolkit has been a nice batteries-included way to use redux for a while now https://redux-toolkit.js.org/
But the popularity of Redux especially in the earlier days of react means there are quite a lot of redux codebases around, and by now many of them are legacy.
> In 2029, AI will not be able to watch a movie and tell you accurately what is going on (what I called the comprehension challenge in The New Yorker, in 2014). Who are the characters? What are their conflicts and motivations? etc.
> In 2029, AI will not be able to read a novel and reliably answer questions about plot, character, conflicts, motivations, etc. Key will be going beyond the literal text, as Davis and I explain in Rebooting AI.
> In 2029, AI will not be able to work as a competent cook in an arbitrary kitchen (extending Steve Wozniak’s cup of coffee benchmark).
> In 2029, AI will not be able to reliably construct bug-free code of more than 10,000 lines from natural language specification or by interactions with a non-expert user. [Gluing together code from existing libraries doesn’t count.]
> In 2029, AI will not be able to take arbitrary proofs from the mathematical literature written in natural language and convert them into a symbolic form suitable for symbolic verification.
Many of these have already been achieved, and it's only early 2026.
[1]https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/dear-elon-musk-here-are-fi...
Hard disagree. Companies can and do subsidize products to gather market share. It's just a loss leader [1]. The big money for them is likely satisfied software engineers pushing their employers to pay for more Anthropic products in an enterprise setting.
> Be thoughtful when using `useEffect`. Read docs at https://react.dev/learn/you-might-not-need-an-effect to understand if you really need an effect
This is what the parent said.
> some simple code for your personal website
This is your (reductive) characterization of their work. That's fine, but please keep in mind that that's your inference, not what the parent said.
Calling tools like Claude Code a "semi-random word generator" is certainly a choice, and I suspect it won't age well.
Ruby on Rails is probably a great counter example here though.
Hard disagree. There are very few scenarios where I'd pick speed (quantity) over intelligence (quality) for anything remotely to do with building systems.
Didn't the parent comment compare Sonnet vs Codex with GPT5?