News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

stymaar

Nobody said they outright “lied”, most misleading statements are “100% accurate” yet are designed to mislead the reader.

And when you see the reactions in the HN comment to the original article, it's pretty clear that most people have indeed been mislead.

They did, except they also did write an abstract and a title that will mislead anyone who isn't going to read the full paper in details.

It's fair to say that this is malpractice.

> many cults do this regularly

Where have you seen a trillion dollar IPO from a cult?

Re:Astra can read and write weights to improve Qwen on Tuesday November 03, 2026 @07:16AM (#50351064)
Thank you for sharing that, it's a shame that the overhyped paper received this much attention while this one ended up burrowed beyond eyesight.
Re:Astra can read and write weights to improve Qwen on Tuesday November 03, 2026 @06:23AM (#50350621)
> Experiments 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6. All of these are technical breakthroughs

I haven't wrapped my head around 5 and 6 so maybe these are a bigger deal, but 1,2 and 3 are trivial. And the author's writing about 7 and 8 (which show that 7 is just directional ablation and nothing more) really doesn't inspire confidence in the paper as a whole.

Re:Astra can read and write weights to improve Qwen on Tuesday November 03, 2026 @06:14AM (#50350548)
> about the fact we are dealing with a system that reasons successfully over a raw bulk of extraordinarily opaque data without breaking a sweat. That ability is alien

But it's not what's happening here at all! Read the thing in detail and you'll see that it's not doing anything alien, it does exactly what you (or at least someone with at least some knowledge abouy neural nets) would do if you were asked to perform the task. It doesn't reason about weights in a magical way, instead it reads the easy to interpret parts or use directional ablation to tweak a model's behavior, exactly like how the ERP folks have been decensoring models to produce adult content over the past two years.

It's an interesting demonstration of ML knowledge and agentic ability, but it's not alien NY any means, and it's not actually surprising given how strong today's models are with agentic work.

> $200 of usage on a $20/mo plan is a 10X multiplier. […] So $200 * 10X = $2000/month. I don't know how you got to $8000.

FYI there are 4 weeks in a month…

> Recent analysis by industry analysts like Semi Accurate have measured Sol 6.1 on the $200/month plan to be around $2000 of API equivalent use.

Sol isn't an Anthropic product though so maybe OpenAI is less generous than the former, I can't tell.

> If you use 100% of the quota every week it's closer to $2000 at API rates.

I don't know where you got that from but the only time I maxed my $20 plan for a week I made the calculation that I had spend close to $200 in a single week. So maxing a $200 plan for a month should give you $8000 worth of token at API price. Obviously it's not $300k but it's still very far from the retail price.

> The $2T comes from the implied odds (perhaps 10 or 20%) that we get near term AGI or RSI and AI becomes the entire economy

At this point every churches should IPO and raise hundreds of billions from the implied odds that judgment day is near and Paradise becomes the entire economy, that wouldn't be crazier.

Re:Backdoors in official Claude Code extensions on Friday October 30, 2026 @09:29AM (#50303598)
Github's uptime getting stray bullets, I see.
Re:Backdoors in official Claude Code extensions on Friday October 30, 2026 @08:30AM (#50303008)
I read a few month ago a comment from an Anthropic or OpenAI employee saying that the security problem of prompt injection was a solved problem at this point, as the frontier models where rejecting 98% of attacks.

It tells you all you need to know about how unserious these people are about computer security.

It's nice to see more storage being added, but we have keep thr order of magnitude in mind: the peak electricity demand for the US is 750GW, so the added storage for the past 3 month corresponds to just 96 seconds of peak consumption.

There's still a very long way to go !

Re:GPT-6.1 Terra on Monday October 26, 2026 @02:46PM (#50248932)
> I think the names are more of a reference to price. Luna is always cheaper than terra which is cheaper than Sol which is cheaper than Astra

Per token, yes. But per task it's not even necessarily the case depending on how much thinking is needed.

Re:Anthropic S-1 on Monday October 26, 2026 @01:33PM (#50247662)
> Put another way Anthropic has committed 52 billion dollar a year

Idk where you got this figure from, but the actual figure are very different from that:

It's 120B over four years for SpaceX alone and 120B for Broadcom over 6 years. These two players, representing less than half of the total commitment, already give you an annual commitment above 50B.

Re:Anthropic S-1 on Monday October 26, 2026 @09:44AM (#50243592)
I don't think they are betting on that many people subscribing to their $200/mo plan, there's pretty much no upside in using a frontier model for the average consumer.

But on the flip side I don't think aiming for 1M businesses spending $40k a month in token in average is going to be more viable. And I'm not sure having 1000 corporations spending $40M a month is a option either.

It's not a rust specific thing at all, HN has had it's share of “<something> but written in JavaScript” (as well as in Go[1]) back in the day, it's just a common thing when a language becomes popular, as their are more people wanting to show off that they did something than people with genuinely original ideas worth posting on HN.

It's not that Rust or Go aren't used to write new things, it's just that the bar for reaching the HN front page with new things is much higher than for mere copycats.

[1]: https://hn.algolia.com/?q=written+in+Go

Re:Switzerland. Block by block. At 1:1 scale on Monday October 26, 2026 @06:47AM (#50241747)
Interestingly enough the “before it was cheap” version was distributed for free when this one is for sale for half the price of the game this is supposed to run on.
The other criticisms are valid but this one is too much:

> No comparison to astra/6.1 sol/fable 5.1/opus 5.5

I mean, should a 27B model beat Fable 5 but not Fable 5.1 that would still be an incredible achievement.

Interestingly enough, Libya did in fact bomb France two decades before France bombed Libya, via the multiple terrorist proxy Gaddafi financed.
That's irrelevant to the point.
I'm pretty sure it's actually anti correlated: not because degoogled Androids are safer by themselves, but because the average user is way savier than the average Joe (which have an out of date Android full of unpatched security vulnerabilities, in the first place).
> It's calorie-dense and high in sodium?

There's plenty of real food that is as heavy and as salted, and as such no healthier, than junk food. But it actually tastes good. (I can't exactly put the finger on what makes an Italian pizza better than a US 7/11 one, but it's not about the former being healthier).

> Are you saying people unfamiliar with the 'pixel arts' can't enjoy it their own way?

The problem isn't that they look shitty to pixel artists or experts, they look shitty for anyone with a bit of observation.

It's junk art the same way Mc Donald's is junk food.

> Marginal value (which is the relevant measure) of Hydro is not zero, because the used water has a potential value in the future when it could have been used instead.

That only describe a small fraction of hydro power: the majority of hydro in the world is “Run-of-the-river”, which means it has little storage capacity if any.

> Any power-source which can move its production has this feature, independently of renewability.

Not really. For instance, Nuclear gives you the illusion of marginal price because you can think of the cost of the uranium rods, which will be consumed faster or slower depending on your supply, but in practice your maintenance (which are also when the fuel replacement happens) are planned years in advance and are mostly paced by a mix regulatory constraints and staffing needs (your maintenance experts are in limited supply in the country, and you want to keep them busy, so you make sure the maintenance of your park is well ordered with minimal overlaps. Source: my wife makes the long terms plan nuclear maintenance at EDF, here in France).

> This is not just theoretical, it has happened in the European power market.

I know, but this has nothing to do with the question, which is in fact theoretical (“equilibrium prices” are a purely theoretical concept).

> But the equilibrium still exists.

Nope, not in the meaning of this word in the classical model (i.e. the intersection of the marginal cost curve and the demand curve).

What exists is a market price, but it's not the “equilibrium price”, and it cannot be because it doesn't exist in this setting.

For agentic coding, Qwen 3.8-27B is not far from that, and Qwen 3.8 Next is there. Never used DeepSeek 4.1 flash but I'd be surprised if it wasn't better than this.
It really depends on the type of task you're doing and how you're using it, because for the past two month the only reason I've had to use my company's paid Opus plan instead of my local Qwen-3.8-Next was speed. I use Qwen as a back-up plan when my token limit is reached and in my day to day work they have been indiscernible in terms of output.
That's not marginal cost though, the full cost (from either maintenance or capital) is due no matter how much electricity is produced.
> the investor class

Too nice of a way to talk about the Epstein class.

> While the power itself is the perfect example of the opposite, where the market should (according to theory at least) be perfect.

Nome, it only works for fossile-based power, for any other power source (be it hydro, nuclear, solar, geothermal or wind) the marginal cost of supply is zero and all the cost is upfront cost. In that situation, the (classical economics) market equilibrium simply doesn't exist mathematically.

Re:The HTML-in-Canvas API origin trial on Friday October 23, 2026 @05:01AM (#50206221)
> https://acko.net/blog/html-is-dead-long-live-html/

I've read your blog enough times to recognize it instantly, yet it's the first time I notice that you blog header is an animated and interactive 3D demo. Very cool!

Older »