I'm sure that HN's preferred app would be <5MB, and has zero third party SDKs or telemetry, but half a dozen SDKs and third party domains is basically most mass market apps these days. Is it bad? Yes, but the whitehouse isn't being egregiously bad, but "whitehouse app is bad, just like most other apps" isn't going to get clicks.
If only. It would be a far better state of of affairs if the US government sucks like every other first world country. No other first country are waging war in the middle east, having paramilitary forces terrorize residents, or are undergoing a partial government shutdown.
For all our faults I am geniunely impressed by gov.uk. its not pretty, its not particularly fast, and its certainly not flashly, but I've never once not been able to find what I needed or have a flow not work.
Open router is an upper bound of compute cost for the open source models. So people assume that opus and sonnet really isn’t sucking up 10x the resources because open source models aren’t 10x worse. Idk if it’s true or not, but haiku is $5/m tokens and it is much worse than the $2-3/mt models imo
I wish this was higher up. I have been tracking the same since Thanksgiving ‘25 and the growth is unreal. Again I don’t know where the cards fall maybe the industry overspent on capex but it’s at least easier to see why they are spending based on demand. The risk of being left out is greater than overbuilding.
I do wonder how much of the apparent demand is driven by companies automatically running these things when users didn't actually ask for it. For example every web search I make now has an AI response that I scroll right past. I'm sure that counts for someone's token usage data, but I got zero value from it. This is happening in almost every software product now.
Tokens as a metric is the analogue of users as a metric.
In the end value per user is what matters in relation to being a healthy going concern and valuation in relation to Meta for example. Value per token is what should matter too - after all that’s what people are paying for.
Sure, and I'm also consuming a gigantic quantity of GenAI art while knowing it, completely against my will. Which like OP has soured my overall perception of it.
The existence of inoffensive use cases doesn't invalidate anything OP is saying, that's just a natural human reaction to overexposure of a technology.
In the span of less than 2 years, pretty much everywhere I look has been inundated with zero-effort spam, manipulated imagery, etc that has had a net-negative impact on my life. Even if it may also be helpful for a small business making a flyer or whatever without actively making my life worse, that doesn't really move the needle on my overall attitude.
Sure, and there’s lot of great man made art that I don’t enjoy quite as much because I can’t get the question out of my head, is this even a photograph someone took, is this even a painting someone bothered to paint. I get the sense that there are a lot of folks that just want the end result judged on its own merits, like, is it a funny vine or not, is it a compelling beautiful digital painting or not, but I want to know whether there’s a person behind it, expressing themselves, growing as an artist etc, or if the picture on my phone is totally divorced from any humans actual desire to say something. Having them mixed in the same pot just makes me less hungry.
This is where curation matters, eg in a newsroom or gallery. Provenance is their job, and if done well, can connect people in a way that an unfiltered social media firehose can't.
Yea fair enough, I’m hoping I can encourage the folks in my life that are not adept at telling truth from fiction to just cut out looking at any social media firehouse.
It’s so dumb that Zuck and Elmo want to inject^H^H^H^H^H^Hrecommend content into these people’s feeds while they’re checking in on their neices and nephews and local book clubs.
Ok, how big of an issue? How many students? How much wasted on fraud? I went to a top school where sometimes students tried to fake residency. It was essentially a non issue in the grand scheme of the potential waste for a school district to generate.
All of the children get an education, but you have to divide up the attendance across the available schools.
A single child going to the incorrect school isn’t going to break the system, but when it starts happening at scale it starts diluting the per-student funding in a district, increasing class sizes (reducing the teacher to student ratio) and eventually puts the school over limits and forces nearby children who should be going there into schools that are farther away.
One or two students don't make a difference. But if a number of people lie, then that dilutes the experience of the legit students. So it's not just as simple as you make it sound.
Here's an extreme example. One boy I know went to a school from kindergarten. He was tall and expected to start on the basketball team. Suddenly,in his junior year, several great players showed up from out of nowhere. There were lots of rumors about whether they were legitimately allowed to enroll, but in the end several lifelong students were bumped from the team. The coach was happy. The principal loved the idea. The kids presumably enjoyed the new school. But there were several others who lost an opportunity.
There are downsides to open door policies like you're endorsing. Most of the time, they're not so visible. But when resources are finite, people get hurt.
The product is putting the skills / harness behind the api instead of the agent locally on your computer and iterating on that between model updates. Close off the garden.
Not that I want it, just where I imagine it going.
Honestly I’ve been sick to my stomach these past few days. I wasn’t even looking for the files and saw some in my feed on Reddit.
Basically take the most sad and disturbing Eastern European horror and put it in email form.
I had to stop my Seinfeld rewatch because I saw one email were he just happened to be boating by and stopped by the island for lemonade.
The richest people and political elite were openly trading prices on children, leaving rave reviews on child services and how great that torture film was that was sent
I'm glad I'm not the only one who doesn't buy the "separate the artist from the artwork" line.
I can't say I've ever watched Seinfeld, but there are plenty of other artists whose work I just won't consume anymore because they've done things I find despicable (and that I know of).
Why would I want to see or hear them or even think about them while trying to enjoy something?
Go look at the photos and tell me that everyone is overreacting. If anything people are under reacting.
After the 3-4th blacked out little girl showing her genitals so they can be sold, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that if someone is connected to the island they need to be thoroughly investigated. That’s not a stretch.
Replies like yours are what’s sick downplaying the most prolific industrial child rape in modern America and only one person is sitting in prison. And none of the customers.
I haven't seen those photos. Are they so bad that they justify smearing someone who was only mentioned in a huge trove and regardless of context? Will I go into a righteous omnidirectional rage if I see them too?
I didn’t smear anyone. I said I stopped my rewatch.
After investigating Jerry further, yeah dating a 17 year old high schooler and picking her up after school is equal distressing.
So thank you for your astute analysis and defense of a person who drove to a high school to have a physical relationship 21 years younger but I’ll hold off on watching Seinfeld for now. If that’s not too controversial.
It’s a factual statement that email exists. If it is true or not is another thing.
I don’t think it’s controversial to say someone with a history of pedophilia (yes a grown 38 yo man 17yo highschooler is pedophile) being mentioned a the island should at least step back and investigate it.
In my European country, the age of consent it 15 (or 13?), but it is also in the law that if the adult have a hierarchical/coercive power on the minor (parent, teacher, public servant, host/landlord, boss, probably other), the consent is automatically removed and this is pedophilia. It is the same in Spain, and I'd bet in Portugal.
The age of consent being this low is to avoid prosecuting 15-20 yo having sex with each other. Not for gross old men to coerce minors into having sex with them.
Why does minority/majority matter? Minors are considered inferior to majors. They can't vote, and can't decide most of their life by themselves (loans, bank account...). We consider it 'normal' for them to get yield at/beaten by their parents (and once upon a time, teachers). The _minimum_ society can do to make up for them is protecting them as much as it can. And that means protecting them from predators like Epstein or even Seinfeld.
> The age of consent being this low is to avoid prosecuting 15-20 yo having sex with each other. Not for gross old men to coerce minors into having sex with them.
I don't buy this argument. That is addressed by age gap laws which some countries have or in the U.S. where there age of consent is different if one of the parties is over 18 and 21.
You can't honestly be claiming that these type of relationships don't occur in these countries. The fact is that in homogeneous populations there seems to be way more tolerance for these kind of age gaps.
I'm not. I'm claiming that if, as a teacher, employer, parent, or anybody the justice system recognize have power over a minor, you have a relationship with him or her, the consent is waived, even if they gave you explicit consent. That's all.
So as long as any victims is a minor, even if the victim is 17 and gave explicit consent, if the predator have provable power over her, the consent is waived and it is a pedophilic sexual assault
Exchanging a home for sexual favours to a minor in France is considered pedophilia, you can find articles about a recent case.
Sorry I am repeating myself but I want to be sure you understood my main point and engage with it rather than with a straw man.
Second comment from you trying to "explain" that what Jeffrey did was "legal" in some countries. Only problem is that there's plenty of evidence that there are multiple victims that are in the "children" territory, not teenager.
By the way, if you're trying to truly combat antisemitism, it would be wise of you to avoid mentioning that you are jewish and defend old farts fucking teenagers in the same comment.
You've broken the site guidelines extremely badly by attacking another commenter in this way, and your other flamewar posts in this thread are not good either. This is not the kind of discussion we want here, so please stop.
Nice spin on what I said. Never "defended" Epstein or claimed what he did was legal, rape, sex trafficking...
Nor did I defend "old farts fucking teenagers".
What I did do was point out that this behavior seems to be viewed differently when the participant is a Jewish man than when he is French or Anglo.
> By the way, if you're trying to truly combat antisemitism, it would be wise of you to avoid mentioning that you are jewish and defend old farts fucking teenagers in the same comment.
Between this and your comments that you believe Epstein was eating children, it's hard for me to take your advice as being in good faith.
There are multiple different conversations which you are referencing there which is making it difficult to respond to your points.
On Epstein, I do think the Catholic Church scandal was of a similar magnitude, considering the number of priests and victims involved. The main point I was trying to convey is that the coverage of Epstein is greater than anything I have seen and there is a danger of it being used to promote anti-semitism. Just search the topic on X to see thousands of examples.
Regarding my comments on the age of consent, I am sensitive to words used to describe someone like Seinfeld. Pedophilia and specifically acting on it is one of the worst crimes anyone can commit. Branding someone a pedophile is a very serious accusation. That is a common trope used to describe Jewish men.
Jerry may be a lecher or a scumbag or a pervert, but I have difficulty using that word in his case, and I think in that context the mores in different countries is important. Maybe I am being paranoid and seeing anti-semitism where it isn't.
reply