turblety

Yeah it's infuriating. I love how even Apple are embarrassed by it, since in the first two animations of people holding and rotating the device they've left off the camera bump, making it look smooth flat.

The entire publicsuffix thing is such a mess. The fact that project even exists is ridiculous. Why can this not be a dns setting?

Yeah go for it. It was really fun to build and I learned a lot about how these harnesses work. Definitely recommend building something like this.

For me, the use case is in my Remote Terminal app I'm building [1].

I have an agents sidebar that shows every running agent on the machine with the state. So I end up creating a kanban like board for all the agents based on if it needs my attention, is done or still working.

1. https://terminay.com

Hey, yeah I have two rules:

1. I don't want to extend the the harnesses in any way, not even hooks/plugins/etc 2. I don't want to poll, ever. It must be system events, file system watches

So I have to basically watch each session file from every harness for changes and derive a state from that.

Most CLI's have a file per process with some stats like the pid, state, is idle or not, etc, which is really helpful.

Each agent has a small provider that knows how that specific harness works, and watches it for changes. e.g. ~/.claude/sessions/{pid}.json

Those registries are small and change much less than transcript formats do.

But yeah, I think this will always be a matter of keeping it up to date.

I would like to retain support for older harness versions as I go.

I'm not sure. The problem with the cloud llm's is they are complete black boxes that change frequently and randomly day by day.

If you run Qwen 3.8 on your own hardware, every single day, it's the exact same model running in the exact same way.

Yes, it's nowhere near as "smart" as the cloud based models. But it's consistent.

So the workflows and "ways of working" you create will work mostly similar day to day.

With Claude/OpenAI you frequently find days where the models are useless, and days when they are out of this world.

So I guess the choice comes down to:

1. Randomly the smartest thing on the planet with unpredictable rate limits that is mostly amazing, but frequently messes with your workflows

2. A really good local coding model that is consistent every day with no rate limits

I'm not sure. My gut feeling is maybe the right answer is a mix of both.

Gambling on the biggest models, hoping they are working smart that day, when planning or doing very complex work. Then doing most of the tasks/daily work using local models??

I don't like Apple as a company or how they act around locking people out of the devices they buy.

I'm willing to pay double the cost of a MacBook Pro for anything that can run Linux, similar performance to M5, have a decent battery, good touchpad, be silent, have a good display, be light and portable.

It doesn't exist. MacBook's simply have the best hardware, but terrible software/philosophy of software.

So I'd say their moat is hardware in general. Performance, yes to an extent, but it's performance vs heat vs energy vs battery life and all their peripherals.

I think the answer to this is yes, it'll be just like "reading and understanding your assembly". We just don't check what instructions your code compiles down to anymore, and I think the same will be for code.

100% agree. I've ended up building my own [1][2] mostly because I got annoyed the agent cli's are building remote control into the agents, instead of into the terminal. I really want the agent cli's to focus on being the best autonomous agents, then let me choose a great terminal that does all the extra.

Another great option (not mine) is Orca [3] and it's a lot more mature. Really nice to use.

1. https://github.com/markwylde/terminay

2. https://terminay.com

3. https://www.onorca.dev

Did they give a reason why it was declined? Was it some bureaucratic "form not filled in correct" thing, or are they actually against the concept of it?

Please do consider moving away from Github to a self hosted Gitea instance: https://about.gitea.com/

It's amazing and very simple to run/setup. It's been really stable for me for years now, and takes basically no maintenance.

That's not really what "being the product" its commonly recognised as.

Vivaldi go out to their customers (that's not you) and say "We have 1000 suckers who have downloaded and use our closed source, Chromium cloned, browser. We can serve your website as a bookmark to them, or add you to their search engine list if you give us $x."

Since you are not their "customer" (that's the people paying them to appear in your settings) what are you? You are the "product", you are what Vivaldi is selling.

Happy to discuss.

I'm not sure if this [1] is still relevant, but it appears that Vivaldi makes money by promoting search engines and bookmarks to their users via their closed source, secret, Chromium fork.

If my usage of their Chromium clone is being used to sell search engines/website bookmarks, then I am indeed the product.

There does also seem to be a VPN option on their site that I'm assuming I can pay for, which seems it could be an actually buyable product rather than selling my usage of their browser.

1. https://vivaldi.com/blog/vivaldi-business-model/

Because it's a proprietary closed source fork of Google Chromium. There's nothing to trust. If it's free and closed source, you are the product.

I'm building yet another terminal [1][2] for macOS and Linux. I've been unsatisfied with the window management of iterm2 and other terminals, my one acts a bit more like Chrome with projects at the top level.

It also allows remote control. I don't like AI harnesses (Claude / OpenAI) having remote control inside, it feels like it should be at the terminal level, not the cli.

It also allows commands at the terminal level. So if you use multiple ai cli's you don't only need to write the command once, then use cmd+l to inject into any cli.

I've put macros in too, that again can automate doing the same thing in a terminal.

Anyway I'm sure this will just end up another terminal in a sea of already existing ones.

1. https://github.com/markwylde/terminay

2. https://terminay.com

> Good job! Now since we don’t really need to go that faster, ill fire half of you so I and my investors friends can make more profit.

Is this a thing? Are there companies out there that don't want to go faster?

Absolutely. Thing is, I'd actually rather take a worse model than Anthropic, so long as it's consistent. Like, a model that can successfully do well for 80% of tasks is much better than Anthropic that some days will be 90% other 60%.

When you have a consistent model, you can incorporate fixes/prompts into your workflow to make it behave better. But this, always having to guess if Anthropic has quantised the model today, wastes so much time and effort.

Yeah I understand. I think my point is don’t add any other friction to the password strength other than length. If you want more security increase the min length, if you’re happy with less, lower it.

I’d personally have a 12 length password enforcement, a password strength meter and nothing else. Possibly less if you introduce 2fa.

There really are only two dials you can turn to increase the security of a password, and that's length of the character set (the characters that the user can use in their password) and length of the password itself.

People should be using a password manager, then they can set that to 100/200 characters. Even if all lower case, it will be unbreakable (assuming a modern/secure one way hashing algorithm, and the password manager is truly random.).

If they are not using a password manager and use something like `waterfall!X` (because you enforce a special character and capital letter) you haven't actually increased entropy by that much, compared to a longer password. Them making up a 100 character password will almost guarantee more entropy than a short password they make up like `waterfall!X`

Also, because it's the internet [1]:

1. https://xkcd.com/936/

What a waste of tokens. No wonder Anthropic can't serve their customers. It's not just a lack of compute, it's a ridiculous waste of the limited compute they have. I think (hope?) we look back at the insanity of all this theatre, the same way we do about GPT-2 [1].

1. https://techcrunch.com/2019/02/17/openai-text-generator-dang...

Yeah it's much better, another plus is you can use it with OpenCode (or other 3rd party tools) so you can easily switch between Codex and most other models by alright companies (not Anthropic or Google).

This is amazing news. I look forward to my bills going up again next month!

I switched a year ago and have been absolutely loving them. Not just because we can support a EU based CDN, but their Magic Containers are amazing. I can have global instantly scalable API's that cost me barely $1 a month until used.

It's so disappointing that we could have had Usenet, but instead have centralised/corporate/ad/spyware invested Facebook/Reddit/Xitter/Tiktok.

Maybe the bakery expands to make more than just loaves of bread, maybe different cakes, sandwiches, maybe expand delivery to nearby towns.

They build that using GPT-5.4

> Theme park simulation game made with GPT‑5.4 from a single lightly specified prompt

GPT literally built that game.

Google are also destroying that path by delaying the releases more and more.

This was the analogy I was looking for! It feels like a very creepy way to make money, almost scammy and the gym membership/overselling hits the nail.

Codex is Open Source though, so I wonder at what stage me adding features to Codex is different from me starting a new project and using the subscription.

But I believe OpenAI does let you use their subscription in third parties, so not an issue anyway.