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

technical preview in June 2021. I was using it for a bit before that as an internal employee. so they may have rounded up slightly or also were an internal beta test

side note, I’ve been trying to remember when it launched internally if anybody knows. I feel like it was pre-COVID, but that’s a long timeline from internal use to public preview


Yes, the technical preview of Github Copilot. I rounded up.

fair enough! the jump from that to ChatGPT’s launch (which I didn’t find that interesting), to gpt-4, to Claude Code/Codex CLI, to Gemini 3/Opus 4.5/GPT 5.2 has been insane in such a short time. I’m excited (since the release of the Codex CLI especially: https://dkdc.dev/posts/modern-agentic-software-engineering/)

this argument is nonsense…I write code on a macbook running macos. it’s not a subscription, but some people also pay a subscription for a proprietary IDE. so any FOSS written with proprietary paid software doesn’t count to you? only if it’s a subscription model?

> I write code on a macbook running macos. it’s not a subscription

You already answered yourself, but let's pretend yours is a valid point: you lose access to Jetbrain IDE you can still code on another free ide/text editor and still give to society without heavily relying on ai somewhere in the cloud of the tech bros, which they don't want to give back to society, they want to be the gatekeepers of programming.


and you can switch AI providers, or use local LLMs. again, a nonsense point to raise about how FOSS is developed. coding “by hand” also doesn’t go away. if you lose your proprietary tools (laptop, OS, IDE, or coding agent) you can always work around it

just fine? what do you think would happen/what’s your actual argument against out of curiosity

Advertising is how I learned about lots of things I am glad I learned about.

I am furious about lots of the ads that I see. I want to stop certain kinds of advertising. I live where there are no billboards allowed and I love that.

But I want to live in a world where people can pay to have their messages displayed where they will be seen. Simply because banning that activity would cripple the flow of information. That’s what advertising is.

If you want to ban a particular form of advertising then say what and why. The “ban all ads” thing just doesn’t make sense.


information flows fine without paid ads, and with much better incentives

> people can pay to have their messages displayed where they will be seen

…why? distribution of information is free across the world, which was not the case a century ago. let the message speak for itself

I ask again, what’s your actual argument against? you’ve seen things through ads you’ve liked? you think people should be allowed to pay to put their thumbs on the scale of the distribution of information? to what end?


What do you propose to ban? How do you define it? You want a policy, so write the policy and let me read it.

I have a very broad idea of what ads are. Maybe you don’t. Say what you mean by paid ads.

Am I allowed to offer and accept compensation for boosting one message above others, or not? Would I be allowed to place a hyperlink on my site in exchange for a reciprocal hyperlink? That’s a clear example of compensated communication. That’s what I think ads are.

Imagine the ad police. “You blogged about a product. Someone said you sounded insincere. Let’s see the receipt for purchase. Can’t prove you bought it? Prove you weren’t compensated for your blog post or pay a fine.” Kafka land.


The US already has what you call an ad police: for decades, it has been unlawful to make false statements in an ad and to accept any money for advertising (or endorsement or sponsorship) without making it plain to the viewer which parts of the content are ads and which are not.

Since the US Federal Trade Commission can smoothly enforce the second of those two rules, what makes you think it cannot smoothly enforce an outright ban on ads? "Smoothly": you seem to have been unaware that the second of the rules I described existed, and you probably would have been aware if the enforcement had yielded anything deserving of the name "kafka land".


> Imagine the ad police. “You blogged about a product. Someone said you sounded insincere. Let’s see the receipt for purchase. Can’t prove you bought it? Prove you weren’t compensated for your blog post or pay a fine.” Kafka land.

immediately to a fantasy slippery slope argument, cool!

your argument seems to boil down to paid ads being the lifeblood of the flow of information. my argument is it corrupts that flow of information, and we’d be better without them —- everything would operate just fine. individuals and organizations would have better incentives to share valuable information, not what they get paid to. obviously there would be plenty of details and edge cases to work out, as with any policy in the real world

I’m not going to write out policy in HackerNews comments and play that game with someone who jumps to the “imagine this crazy world where the police start arresting all of us over free speech!” as their explanation for what would go wrong


- performance is often better, especially on “out of core” (“streaming”, spill to disk data sizes). Polars has done a ton of work on their streaming engine but they’re still catching up

- you don’t need to use Python (but Pythonic wrappers like Ibis exist; disclaimer I worked on Ibis, you can find my blogs on performance comparisons easily there); CLI, WASM, etc. w/o Python

- governance: DuckDB as OSS is setup in a more sustainable way (DuckDB Labs + DuckDB Foundation). while there is a VC-backed company (MotherDuck), it doesn’t employ the primary developers/control the project in the same way the Polars company does

- overall just simplicity and focus. tends to break less, solely focused on single-node, easy to extend, etc. — not trying to do a cloud product, distributing computing, supporting GPU execution


…why do all of those things happen? to sell paid digital advertisement. remove that incentive and I suspect the “social media” problems largely go away

I wish.

In reality, a large enough group of people on the internet starts to turn sour. Especially with anonymity. Especially without a specific purpose like a book club. Especially without moderation.

Small groups where you know everyone is where it’s at. To avoid internet stalkers and bullies, and for general quality of the community。

Our brains are built for small communities, not billions.


I was expecting this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple%E2%80%93FBI_encryption_d...

still doesn’t really prove much


It actually proves that they _don't_ (or didn't) have that kind of access because they first publicly asked for the access and then rescinded that request when they, not officially but widely accepted, acquired access through some kind of hack/bug/exploit given to them by, probably, the IDF or an Israeli private company.

you can set breakpoint() to open an IPython REPL with whatever customizations you want (e.g. I turn on vim keybindings)

I was not aware you shouldn’t do that — what’s the rationale/historical context?

Like most standards: "Because it's a standard". Kind of like setting a .body for a GET request, you can kind of do that, but why not do it the way it's intended to instead? Use POST :)

I have seen post being used instead of get, because of having encrypted parameters by default.

Sending a URL encoded form or some JSON in a POST request is also easier for most people to understand than the myriad ways you might format a query string in the URL (which may have a stricter limit on size).

You only have to look at how different services handle arrays in query strings to understand that serialising it is conceptually easier.

Comes up a lot in search or filter APIs. I'm sure there was some effort many moons ago to create a QUERY method for that.


Yeah, and also because of firewalls sometimes stripping body of GET requests (not responses mind you, we're talking requests) to a server, and also because it's really uncommon to put a body on a GET request ;)

a few reasons:

- agents tend to need (already have) a filesystem anyway to be useful (not technically required but generally true, they’re already running somewhere with a filesystem)

- LLMs have a ton of CLI/filesystem stuff in their training data, while MCP is still pretty new (FUSE is old and boring)

- MCP tends to bloat context (not necessarily true but generally true)

UNIX philosophy is really compelling (moreso than MCP being bad). if you can turn your context into files, agents likely “just work” for your use case


I’m sympathetic to this idea, but there is no LLM training data for how to access random data like this using a filesystem through a FUSE interface.

Yes, it should be able to generically use a filesystem, but there has to be a better way to find an email than greping through each email as a file.

So, I see merit in the idea in theory, I’m just skeptical in practice.


> OpenAI's GPT 5.2 is using the same base model as 4o

where’s that info from?


Not the parent, but the only other source of that claim I found was Dylan Patel's recent post from semianalysis.

Was that for 5.1 or 5.2? I recall that info spreading after 5.1’s release, I guess I naively assumed 5.2 was a delayed base model update.

You can just ask ChatGPT what its training cut-off is, and it'll say June 2024.

Ask! 5.2 says August 2025.

Oh! I stand corrected.

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

Search: