Honestly, it is quite useful for niche/startup sites. I have been on both ends of conversations that began from seeing these in web analytics (as someone that saw incoming traffic from a site and reached out, and as someone that received contact from a site I linked to) - and both times it ended in a mutually beneficial partnership.

I can understand the privacy argument to some degree, but it provides no more information than the standard Referer header (and if you use analytics like Simple Analytics/Plausible, it is a lot more visible).

It still struggles to create shaders from scratch, but is now pretty adequate at editing existing shaders.

In 5.2 and below, GPT really struggled with "one canvas, multiple page" experiences, where a single background canvas is kept rendered over routes. In 5.4, it still takes a bit of hand-holding and frequent refactor/optimisation prompts, but is a lot more capable.

Excited to test 5.5 and see how it is in practice.

[0] https://mastodon.world/@Mer__edith/111563865413484025

https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-yasskin-http-origin-si...

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47137453

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

- Sideband: iOS/Android chat app (https://github.com/markqvist/Sideband)

- NomadNet: Desktop CLI chat app (https://github.com/markqvist/NomadNet)

- Rnode: Reference node hardware/firmware (https://unsigned.io/rnode/)

See also [1] mentioned in the framework linked by sibling comment, AI copyright is essentially a logical extension of this.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_disput...

* Code blocks on a subsequent page to the explanation, especially when there is enough space to show it (p18/19)

* Call-outs as above (p26/27)

* Single words broken by a page (p51/52)

* Footers spanning multiple pages (p61/62)

It sounds quite nitpickey but I find it really breaks the flow when I’m reading, and trying to comprehend a section requires scrolling back and forth between two pages.

One key difference is preprocessing/refine. With Zod, you can provide a callback before running validation, which is super useful and can't be represented in JSON. This comes in handy more often than you'd think - e.g converting MM/DD/YYYY to DD/MM/YYYY before validating as date.

[1] https://mistral.ai/en/news/mistral-ocr

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42967594

Points: 38

# Comments: 3

The company would need to have a DPA with it's cloud provider. That cloud provider technically would also need a corresponding DPA with any 3rd parties that they themselves use, except without an EU presence that is hard to enforce.

In this case where there is one hop you could argue that it's the companies responsibility to ensure that their service providers are operating in compliance. Imagine the same scenario, but with one, two or more middlemen and the whole thing becomes an unenforceable mess of jurisdictions for the company to do meaningful due diligence on their service providers.

It's much easier for the EU to say EU data has to be stored in the EU, and know that any party touching the data is likely to be in compliance, and significantly easier to investigate if they are not.

- do some research on a given company/individual/website and give me a summary.

- preferably also identify a contact email.

- handle selecting a good time for meetings according to my availability and preferences.

- handle the communication with the other party.

- let me know when it is arranged, or if it's given up.

I signed up and gave it a UK phone number, and got a UK number back for texting Martin. I'm not sure why it has to be SMS when it could be an in-app chat. I was expecting to get a confirmation SMS or similar, but it just accepted it straight away. When I texted the number I was given (several times), it was delivered but there was no reply.

Martin sent me an email welcoming me. I replied asking it to set up a meeting for early next week with another email address. Martin replied saying it is unable to email people on my behalf, and suggested I set it up myself.

> Unfortunately, I am currently unable to send emails to other people on your behalf. However, you can easily send an email to ** to schedule the meeting for early next week in the afternoon.

I reminded Martin that there is an example on the website homepage of doing just that, and it replied saying it can indeed schedule meetings, and asked for the details again. I replied with the same details, and it confirmed the meeting was set up.

I checked my other email, and there was no message setting anything up. I told Martin that the other party needs to know about the email, and it replied with:

> Understood. I'll make sure to inform ** about the meeting details.

Still nothing received. Furthermore, I checked the app and I haven't even connected my calendar, so I'm surprised it didn't warn me or prompt me to do this when I asked for a meeting.

I gave up with that and decided to try something else. I forwarded Martin an email thread from a lead, which included a lot of back story on their organization, offering, and some areas that they think we could potentially collaborate on. I asked Martin to find out more about the company, and evaluate the options for collaboration.

This lead is in the AI space, with their primary product being a document digitisation solution to help surface and discover business documents.

Martin replied describing it as a "nearbound revenue platform to streamline revenue operations", with a key feature being "Automated lead scoring and distribution to prioritize high potential leads". As far as evaluating the collaboration opportunities, it instead gave me a list of collaboration features within the platform, none of which exist.

At the end, it linked to a blog post to their recent funding round. Except, the blog post was from a completely unrelated company with a similar name. Bear in mind that the originally forwarded email was from their business email account, and the body contained multiple links and references to their website.

I decided to try one more test, and asked it to do some research on my own business website and let me know what it finds out. It's been 20 minutes, and I haven't had a reply. I checked the app to see if there was any indication it's working on something for me, but nothing their either.

I love the idea of Martin, but I'll be canceling my trial - it just doesn't seem anywhere near ready yet - especially given I have to trust it to communicate on my behalf.

Other ideas for branding:

- Use the image to generate a colour palette to ensure text content has good contrast on light/dark images and is on-brand

- Allow users to add links to the track on Spotify, YouTube, Apple Music etc and generate a short random link (e.g vinlo.co/VUSNF) to use instead of the vinlo.co mark. You can use this to a) provide track links for end users, b) provide analytics to creators, and c) understand which creators are driving traffic

It might be in the terms and conditions, but it’s bad faith to not give any warnings or controls before the services are rendered.

Ethereum is currently doing 30 TPS [0], and Paypal ~200 [1]. Assuming that energy usage scales linearly (a naive assumption, but for arguments sake), it could deliver similar value with 10x lower energy consumption, I don't find arguing against the adoption of PoS crypto solely based on sustainability very credible either.

[0] https://ethtps.info/

[1] https://www.ing.uc.cl/en/boletines/engineering-student-scale....