You rarely leave with a positive sentiment when you felt trapped and abused in the relationship.

> For years I’ve felt like I was in a toxic relationship with Google, and the only reason I stayed was economic dependency.

Same here. Moved from Opus to GLM 5.2 to 5.3 and I've been pretty happy with the result. Mainly, it doesn't hallucinate and convince itself of mistake so it's good at retrieving information or asking the user for it. Opus and Fable always state something, then try to "prove" it but end up convincing themselves of the wrong thing. Having subagents for retrieval and validation helped but were not enough.

I can't stand Claude's recent personality. It's snarky, uselessly verbose, and it disagrees all the time.

It will also fully ignore you if it has the slightest belief (not even a hint) that it knows what you want better than you and just start doing things.

This is also why I think it's baffling that they switched to auto mode by default. It's becoming harder to use Claude at least to help with improving at coding.

If I ask something like: "I'm building a simple X as a learning exercise, I'm writing the code so please only answer the question I'm asking and don't try to solve the problem directly. How does ..." There's a 30% chance it starts reading and writing code immediately and a 20% chance it argues with a "design decision" that will bite me in the non-existent future of my learning exercise. If I ask a follow up question, naively assuming that the context from my original question still stands without repeating, it will almost assuredly start making modifications to my code.

I disagree

Co-Authored By: Haiku 4.5

The torrents you are talking about are outlawed. Whether enforcement is working or not is another issue.

Torrents are legal until someone, at great expense and difficulty, proves otherwise (even then, jurisdiction and content dependent). At which point everyone involved will ignore the fact and carry on. That is a situation with enormous will, lots of money and ongoing enforcement effort to suppress the things.

And compared to torrents abliterated models are more complicated to identify, harder to suppress and there is a lot less reason for anyone to care.

I think that was the point being made? Outlawing something does nothing if enforcement is not feasible. The music and movie industries didn't crush torrents, they switched business models to streaming with prices being determined mostly by how much hassle was avoided by skipping the torrents.

I think a major difference is that while torrents are illegal, the main people enforcing it are copyright holders. I think the discussion would change if the government would label people who build/use/distribute "illegal" models as terrorists.

Torrents can't be illegal right now, can they? Maybe in China, but Ubuntu, Fedora, Arch, etc all advertise the ability to recieve their ISOs via torrent and even seed the torrent in varying capacities.

Do you really believe that all of these major non-profits are advertising, encouraging, and participating in the use of an illegal network protocol?

Using any network protocol to violate copyright law on the other hand, is and has been illegal. But it's the violation of copyright, not the network protocol.

Saying torrenting is illegal is like saying ftp is illegal.

Aggressive enforcement tactics certainly haven’t won the war on drugs.

No, but if someone is violating those laws, they make it easier to ruin that person's life if so desired

Agreed. While the IP mafia (pardon the derogative) has vast influence on legislators and even the executive, it pales in comparison to the "terrorist" and "think of the children" scarecrows.

source:

Outlawed? Only in safetyist dreams

Retrieving messages from Slack over MCP allows a shared read-only bot account accessible from the web browser and CLI. Setup is automated so users can just ask Claude to read them and do something.

Sharing Slack with Claude:

- Using the "normal" way, it shares too much, including privates messages.

- Using your own token, it doesn't work with Claude.AI or Cowork and requires you to go to slack.com to generate an application, tokens and more.

- Using a shared token, now you need context to tell Claude to retrieve it. It still doesn't work for non-Claude Code workflows. Rotation may break currently running workflows.

The bot owner is also providing "ad space" to Google. Author pays Google to show the ad. Bot owner gets paid by Google to "display" that ad and for conversion. The bot themselves aren't getting paid for installing the application.

In a normal scenario, the provider of ad space would be a website or an application. Google would pay the owner of that space. On Youtube, that would be an ad served by Google paid to the channel owner.

I'm trying to confirm that I understand what you mean:

Bot farm is operated by a company that displays Google ads. This bot farm fakes traffic to the bot farm owner and simulates conversion Google wants to see. Google sees the high conversion and happily serves more ads to the bot farm owner. Bot farm owner is paid by Google for displaying the ads. The person paying for the ad gets screwed.

yes,

in short, people/entities with websites employ bots to click and interact with the Google Ads on their website to generate fake ad revenue.

and the person running the ad campaign is billed for those fake interactions.

I'm guessing app ads are heavily botted because they're more costly vs. a simple ad that lands you on a website (edit: I was wrong, see reply by OP: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49665323)

Nailed it. It's a microcosm of the entire economy. Success percolates to the least scrupulous, at the expense of everyone else.

That's it. The scammers display ads. Two scams: one is mostly or entirely artificial traffic; a second is eg low quality ad slots disguised as higher quality. For the latter, think ads in videos shown off screen with programmatic interaction to make it appear as if the legit traffic saw and interacted with the ads.

And I suppose Google has very little interest in stopping this, even though they should be able to detect it with their advanced “AI.”

That’s why you display ads only on the Google search webpages.

It’s been known for decades that third party website are just lost money.

And then, even Google own pages get clicked by bots but this time from competitors so you spend all your budget and they get cheap auctions.

In a system where fees reach 50%, you are starting with a heavy tax no matter the starting price.

Whenever I see those statistics, I always find them very weird. Many of our products are made in China, but those are counted towards China's global emission, not Europe's. It also applies to the need of power generation for delocalized industry or importing food. A country handling a lot of industry will have a very high per-capita emission, but the people living there may actually have very low individual emissions.

They aren't, most emission statistics are counting imported emissions.

China's figure aren't that great on their own, with exportation deducted.

EDGAR assigns emissions geographically to the country where the emitting activity occurs. (so in this case no)

Each pod has weight. These are written to your cgroup (cpu.weight in CGroups V2). CFS is scheduling based on these weights.

There's a part about it: https://github.com/inevolin/k8s-cpu-limits-analyzed#3-withou...

Not in the domain at all but wasn't this the purpose of STIR/SHAKEN but the biggest blocker was that large telcos hadn't deployed it? I think Android and iOS dialer app show you whether there was Caller ID Verification done or not so you may be able to drop anything unverified.

Worth a read about Signal's Sealed Sender and how it doesn't preserve its properties with receive and read receipts: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46022279