All the "oh, but it's different now, it's really safe" implies that the scientist at the time of the Chernobyl disaster didn't give assurance that it's totally safe either.

I am in favor of nuclear power and think that closing the plants was a huge mistake, but it's not somehow fully irrational to opose nuclear power. Not everyone has the hubris of thinking they can evaluate the risks when being shown some data. Nor can they distinguish the difference between "the experts then said it's safe" and "the experts now say it's safe".

The article itself doesn't say "it's better", basically just says "in this one specific benchmark it beat Claude with Claude code". Mind you with multimodality it Opus still beat GLM 5.2 very handily in that same benchmark.

I can't find any contradiction and I don't see anyone lying directly. At most they lead you to imply false things, but they're not untrue at a literal reading.

But that was also very Start-up and America focussed. So if you did web dev in some other country and didn't have colleagues who were into that culture you still might've missed the name.

I think by that logic dangerously-skip-permissions and openclaw should've never been a thing. I agree that people use them too liberally, but I think at some point you have to find a balance between systemic safety risks and individual freedom.

The person you're replying to is making a joke about OpenAI shutting down Sora their video generation "social media" app recently.

Edit: this was what I was remembering: https://x.com/XenoKovah/status/1339914714055368704

Does the Sensor Apple uses not use GLONASS in Russia? Or is it cheapo Android Phones picking up the tag and then sending GPS coords into cloud?

edit: Nvm, I might be dumb, I guess unless your jamming includes all commodity GNSS it's pretty useless.

I just don't want people to litter their heavily polished immaculately styled products that have so clearly bad user-interaction design. E2e testing and closing the loop on LLMs does seem to help here.

Though I really would prefer people click around their own product for at least 5 minutes.

I'd suggest you at least try and mitigate that by having the LLM do extensive e2e testing if you aren't interested in using your own product.

I strongly disagree. How is everything being called an object in any way "heavily OOP"? OOP is not just "I organize my stuff into objects".

You can write OOP code with python but most python code I've seen is not organized around OOP principles.

Is the runtime really that large? I know with wasm 2.0 with garbage collection and exceptions is a bit of a beast but wasm 1.0? What's needed (I'm speaking from a place of ignorance here, I haven't implemented a WASM runtime)? Some contiguous memory, a stack machine, IEEE float math and some utf-8 operations. I think you can add some reasonable limitations like only a single module and a handful of available imports relevant to the domain.

I know that feature creep would almost inevitably follow, but if someone cares about minimizing complexity it seems possible.