One aspect you have to consider is the differences in human beings doing the evaluation. I had a coworker/report who would hand me obvious garbage tier code with glaring issues even in its output, and it would take multiple iterations to address very specific review comments (once, in frustration, I showed a snippet of their output to my nontechnical mom and even my mom wtf’ed and pointed out the problem unprompted); I’m sure all the AI-generated code I painstakingly spec, review and fix is totally amazing to them and need very little human input. Not saying it must be the case here, that was extreme, but it’s a very likely factor.

This is magical because you are both on the exact right path and not right. My theory is there’s a sort of skill to teasing code from AI (or maybe not and it’s alchemy all over again) and this is all new enough and we don’t have a common vocabulary for it that it’s hard for one person who is having a good experience and one person who is not to meaningfully sort out what they are doing differently.

Alternatively, it could be there’s a large swath of people out there so stupid they are proud of code your mom can somehow review and suggest improvements in despite being nontechnical.

That’s not a given. Self-hosted GitLab on my pretty good hardware is still slow. I just opened a very small repo with ~20 files and ~5 commits. The page spun for 5s+ before showing me the directory listing and readme. Subsequent loads are faster (~1s) but still not instant.

Common pattern of checking the claude code issue tracker for a bug: land on issue #12587, auto closed as duplicate of #12043; check #12043, auto closed as duplicated of #11657; check #11657, auto closed as duplicate of #10645; check #10645, never got a response, or closed as not planned, or some other bullshit.

Chainguard, Docker Inc’s DHI etc. There’s a whole industry for this.

By having a reasonably successful open source project while in university. Someone reached out with work in a relevant area. I suppose that gate is mostly shut off these days with the volume of vibe-coded crap (or even non-crap) and uptick of clearly fraudulent stars on GitHub.

It wouldn't be so irritating if thinking didn't start to take a lot longer for tasks of similar complexity (or maybe it's taking longer to even start to think behind the scenes due to queueing).

> Both llama.cpp and ollama are great and focused on different things and yet complement each other

According to the article, ollama is not great (that’s an understatement), focused on making money for the company, stealing clout and nothing else, and hardly complements llama.cpp at all since not long after the initial launch. All of these are backed by evidence.

You may disagree, but then you need to refute OP’s points, not try to handwave them away with a BS analogy that’s nothing like the original.

Article only mentions manually building an irregularly shaped region from an image

> Every horizontal run of non-transparent pixels becomes a tiny rectangle region, and those runs are combined into one final window region

but there's an easier way: you just use a LWA_COLORKEY with SetLayeredWindowAttributes to make a color transparent, like a green screen. I recall building my own desktop mascot that way. Doesn't work with arbitrary image/content of course since the color can't appear in the content region.

My Experian score once took a substantial hit, dropping from ~800 to ~700 or something like that. Didn’t change elsewhere. I applied for the report and realized a quite significant debt appeared on my report, and it wasn’t even in my name! It was under someone else’s name that bore zero similarity to mine, or anyone in my family. Reported to Experian and it got fixed after a week or two. Zero explanation for how it happened. These credit reporting agencies are a joke.

That's more of the fault of whichever institution gave the loan

Leaving a paper trail of you having accessed unauthorized private info is a bad idea, some crazy lawyer could decide to include you in a suit. Just not worth the hassle. Email a tip line about the general situation.

How is it unauthorised if it's freely available via a search without having to bypass any login?

It'd be like putting up an advert and then trying to sue anyone who sees it.

Some crazy lawyer included my parents in a traffic death suit’s defendants while they were victims who had their car badly damaged when the reckless driver rammed into two cars (including my parents’) and two pedestrians. The question isn’t whether you’re at fault, it’s whether you want to risk getting a court summons.

I'm confused about what you're saying - are you saying that your parents risked getting a court summons though they weren't at fault?

Surely the entire point of the court system is to determine who, if anyone, is at fault.

They didn't get a court summons but the court did call and send the plaintiff's filing. They were clearly not in the wrong in that case but it was still a hassle and quite a confusion. The point is people can sue you even if it's BS and you still need to respond.

In this case leaving a paper trail of having accessed unauthorized confidential information looks a lot like being in the wrong, so the potential hassle is a lot higher. You can argue it's not unauthorized after all, and you'll likely win, but you may need to expand time and energy arguing in the first place. And it could be significant.

Edit: In addition, (a) accidentally opening a confidential document -> oops, close immediately; and (b) taking a screenshot could be different legally (NAL yada yada), doing the latter could make it a lot harder to defend yourself.

HN saves

Determining who is at fault involves extreme annoyance and inconvenience for those who had fingers pointed at them, regardless of whether or not they were actually involved. If you involve yourself willingly, you're inviting that on yourself.

Not to forget some eager prosecutors. They can still try to prosecute for accessing material even if they end up losing. Lot of hassle there.

Good call!