Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | recursivegirth's commentslogin

If the Democrats run on legalization they have already lost. Quite no one literally gives a shit about this besides the marginalized people it's going to affect negatively the most.

Can we move on to more important and substantive topics? Something something files.


I think "legalize it" in the platform is more likely to help a democratic presidential candidate than hurt one. Specifically, I think it might attract more liberal voters to the polls in swing states with illegal weed such as GA, NC, and WI.

I agree that I would expect a serious candidate to come with much bolder ideas, but it can fit into a platform in the same way "no tax on tips" fit into the 2024 election. One of many good ideas that will motivate a certain niche of voters.


> Can we move on to more important and substantive topics? Something something files.

Oh no too many of the powerful establishment democrats are friendly with the esteemed bankers, politicians and business leaders in those files.


I think the problem is the way we are using these "secrets" services traditionally. The requesting process/machine should NEVER see the Oauth client secret. The short-lived session token should be the only piece of data the server/client are ever privy too.

The service that encrypts the data should be the ONLY service that holds the private key to decrypt, and therefore the only service that can process the decrypted data.


The service wouldn't have access to the refresh token? How does authentication with the client-secret-holding intermediary work?

It's easy to see how this would work with sufficiently sophisticated clients in some use-cases, say via a vault plugin, but posing this as a universal necessity feels like a big departure from typical oauth flows, and the added complexity could be harmful depending on what home-grown solutions are used to implement it.


Ah, Theo with his vast insights and connections into everything. That man gets around, and his content is worth it's cost.

Theo's content boils down to the same boring formula. 1. Whatever buzzword headline is trending at the time 2. Immediate sponsored ad that is supposed to make you sympathize with Theo cause he "vets" his sponsors. 3. The man makes you listen to a "that totally happened" story that he somehow always involved himself personally. 4. Man serves you up an ad for his t3.chat and how it's the greatest thing in the world and how he should be paid more for his infinite wisdom. 5. A rag on Claude or OpenAI (whichever is leading at the time) 6. 5-10 minutes of paraphrasing an article without critical thought or analysis on the video topic.

I used to enjoy his content when he was still in his Ping era, but it's clear hes drunken the YT marketer kool-aid. I've moved on, his content gets recommend now and again, but I can't entertain his non-sense anymore.


I just wanted to chime in and say I think he is knowledgeable; he's not a con. I know you didn't say that, but people might have the impression he doesn't know what he's talking about. He does know, and I've learned quite a lot from him in the past.

However, since the LLM Cambria explosion, he has become very clickbaity, and his content has become shallow. I don't watch his videos anymore.


Not that I ever had confidence in his technical knowledge, but it went to zero when he confidently asserted that there was no possible way a single server could handle the massive traffic some NextJS app he had made was serving. He then posted the bill - which was about $5K IIRC - and I was able to determine from the billed runtime and memory that a modestly-spec’d RPi could in fact handle it.

> he's not a con.

When you're putting the bar that low, sure.

He's about as knowledgeable as the junior you hired last week, except that he speaks from a position of authority and gets retweeted by the entire JS slop sphere. He's LinkedIn slop for Gen Z.


I don't watch his content, but I felt comfortable posting his link as I believe he's generally considered a reputable guy? His tweets sometimes come up in my for you tab and he seems reasonable and knowledgable generally? Maybe I'm wrong and shouldn't have linked to him as a source.

He's kind of like an LLM in that his content has the surface texture of something substantial, and sometimes it's backed by substance, yet it's often half-true or totally off the mark too. You'll notice if you're previously acquainted with what he's talking about, otherwise he seems to be as you described.

I don't think he's a bad guy or that he's trying to be misleading. I suspect he wants his content to actually carry value, but he produces too much for that to be possible. Primarily he's a performer, not a technologist.


I agree with this comment. YouTube's summarize this video feature has been a godsend when it comes to Theo's videos.

Nothing on x.com is reputable at this point.

There's a difference between releasing your tax returns, being compelled to release your tax returns, and someone leaking your tax returns.

The notion that it's a gentlemanly tradition means nothing. Codify it into law if releasing tax returns is such a big issue. In this case particular, I don't think the leaked tax returns have produced the effect that was desired, so it seems silly that this is what it has resolved to. I wonder if it ever mattered at all, given what we know about Trump nowadays.

Ultimately it's the rich people on the hill pulling all strings, the rest of us are just left to hold the bag.


Can't codify it into law. The limitations to becoming president are listed in the Constitution, and it doesn't mention tax returns.

Alas, it is unfortunate that the founders did not consider a mechanism for amendments to be introduced

Consumerism... if it ain't the best, some people don't want it.

Time/frustration

If it’s all slop, the smallest waste of time comes from the best thing on the market


I spend more time in planning and steering the AI implementation than I do on reviewing it's outputs.

I do the obvious checks like tests and spin up a dev instance to make sure the feature works like I want it too, but very rarely am I reviewing every line of code these days.


Slightly agree, however I prefer third party forms as it usually avoids a bunch of the BS with bot submissions, etc.


This, I've officially been off Windows for a few months and will not be looking back. Microsoft has put a bad taste in my mouth as a developer.

By luck and happenstance, I tuned into the Omacon conference this morning and my perspective on personal computing very much aligns with theirs. Would encourage a least watch the kickoff keynote if the VODs drop.


I bought a $30 Z.ai Coding Plan sub to go with it. 7 million tokens has only gone through 2% of my weekly usage using the GLM-5.1 model. I am pretty happy.

I am only doing single project workflows, but with Z.ai I feel like it opens a whole new door to parallel workflows without hitting usage limits.


Is GLM-5.1 actually good?

I tested one of the other models that everyone is raving about yesterday (Qwen 3.6 plus) and within minutes found myself arguing with it even over a very simple task. After about 30 minutes (in which token usage never went over 50k because it was just me rewinding to give it more and more explicit instructions which it kept ignoring), I reverted everything and did it with Opus in literally about 4 minutes, after intentionally giving Opus a much more vague prompt.


I've had a good experience so far. Idk if I would attribute that to Pi or the GLM models. However, it feels nice not being constrained by usage.


Yeah, that's pretty much the lines I was thinking along. Perhaps use codex for planning / reviews, but otherwise go with z.ai / minimax for actual implementation. Thanks!


Thanks, learned something new. I found and setup Open Snitch on my machine - super intuitive. This is going to give me great peace of mind.


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: