As I understand it, anything publicly viewable is free to be scraped without issue.
If you scrape stuff behind a sign-up, you potentially open yourself up to being sued for breach of ToS.
Now I'm sure the Chinese labs don't give a rats arse about that threat, but I imagine it stops the likes of Google, OAI, Anthropic from scraping and instead forces them to purchase the data.
Not how it works ... Anything public viewable is still subject to a TOS. And the whole copyright or whatever still applies.
If your argument was valid, we can scrape news websites and show their content freely. No ... You get sued and lose the case.
See Google News that got their behinds in court and lost. Short summaries are allowed / transformative, but you can not just take content (even without a login). Not without getting into civil court if somebody wants to press the matter.
Now, if you scrap and never make that data public or transform it (LLMs). Then it becomes a harder matter to deal with.
With simple prompting it works sometimes but less reliably. I implemented a healing and strengthening algorithm which can improve codes that don't scan quickly.
Trying to polish a bunch of my projects I've worked on over the years but never had the cojones to release to the wider world:
Hallways (https://hallways.lonnycorp.com) - a web browser for 3D spaces, where instead of hyperlinks you have portals that you can seamlessly walk through
LonnyMQ (https://lonnymq.lonnycorp.com) - a performant, production-ready TS PostgreSQL message queue library and accompanying blog post that walks through its design (of which I'm quite proud of)
I think _some_ but not _too much_ typechecking is the sweet spot for LLMs.
Without any typechecking, LLMs obviously find it harder to work agentically and validate their work.
With too much typechecking (I'm looking at you, rust), I've found agents get themselves stuck in local "architectural minima" and end up doing insane shit to mitigate ownership/borrow-checker issues inherent in the design they ended up with.
That said, if you're hands-on I think rust is a fantastic language for pairing with an LLM.
Presumably because API keys are n bytes of random data vs. a shitty user-generated password we don’t have to bother using a salt + can use something cheap to compute like SHA256 vs. a multi-round bcrypt-like?
I think they are saying passwords are salted and we use multiple rounds of hashing to prevent rainbow tables and slow down brute-forcing the password (in case of db leak). We don't need to do that for randomized long strings (like api keys), no one is guessing 32 character random string, so no salt is needed and we don't need multiple rounds of hashing.
Bugginess in the Claude Code CLI is the reason I switched from Claude Max to Codex Pro.
I experienced:
- rendering glitches
- replaying of old messages
- mixing up message origin (as seen here)
- generally very sluggish performance
Given how revolutionary Opus is, its crazy to me that they could trip up on something as trivial as a CLI chat app - yet here we are...
I assume Claude Code is the result of aggressively dog-fooding the idea that everything can be built top-down with vibe-coding - but I'm not sure the models/approach is quite there yet...
Bots get so good that they become indistinguishable from humans. If that’s true then it doesn’t actually matter if your community is all bots. But it does matter because authenticity matters to humans. They will seek authenticity where they can successfully sense it, which will be in-person.
Human simulacrums will one day cause a repeat of this issue. Then we’ll have a whole Blade Runner 2049 issue about what exactly is authenticity?
>transactional emails from various services that you’ve signed up for
These are one of the main culprits of unwanted emails... and a toll system would make them all the more valuable for the even worse actors to take advantage of.
HN may not be “mainstream” but it is certainly _very_ vulnerable to bot spam given the topics discussed and the make-up of the audience.
You can already see it happening now - at least the bots that write like vanilla Claude/ChatGPT. Presumably there is a much larger hidden cohort of bots that are instructed to talk more naturally and thus are better adept at flying under the radar…
If you are rate limited, a moderator has manually applied a rate limit to your account. Accounts are not rate limited by default. You can appeal the decision by emailing hn@ycombinator.com.
I think there's a short-term rate limit applied to everyone, e.g. you get a message if you try to post three replies in the same minute. I've seen it once, and I don't think I'm active enough to have earned a manual flag.
The karma points you get on HN are worthless, which I think is a bonus. They don't buy you anything. On Reddit, for instance, many parts of the site are walled off until you have "farmed" enough karma to participate.
You get the right to down vote and if I promote my totally not a scam product on HN, people will check my user account and see: on wow over 9000 karma? Gotta be trust worthy, when in truth it's just been karma farming.
I don't know, never found much value in karma. I recreate an account at least once a year for no particular reason and it roughly takes me a week to get enough karma to do what is important (flagging posts).
I’ve never seen people on the likes of blackhatworld selling hacker news accounts or services. The glass half full take on this is that hn is surprisingly robust in its ability to deal with vote manipulation.
If you scrape stuff behind a sign-up, you potentially open yourself up to being sued for breach of ToS.
Now I'm sure the Chinese labs don't give a rats arse about that threat, but I imagine it stops the likes of Google, OAI, Anthropic from scraping and instead forces them to purchase the data.
reply