This is not a defence of DHH, just providing context to his comments.

Rust has compile time checks to enforce some safety. In comparison Fil-C is a lot more memory safe, it's more comparable to being a software implementation of CHERI.

Unfortunately it comes with downsides: runtime performance, runtime enforcement, granular safety (the safety is around allocations).

It also comes with huge upsides: you can run C/C++ with little to no code changes. Imagine compiling nginx and the associated system libraries with Fil-C, the performance hit is probably acceptable and now the web server is memory safe.

Rust probably provides enough memory safety (even if it is not complete safety) in most circumstances though.

It's not about giving away resources, it's about serving the user.

1. No, a kiosk shouldn't be hooked up to some crime database, it should function exactly as expected in situ.

2. A self-service checkout machine shouldn't 'give away' free stuff, it should however let you pay and leave.

3. An ATM should give the user money from their account - without added charge for the convienance.

I think 2 and 3 are bad examples because they actually already exist in the way that Andrew is saying things should exist. If they didn't (for example, they played a 30 second advert before you could checkout) then people would never have started using them.

Software/SaaS/startups are much more inclined to use dark patterns and attempt to bleed the users dry (either their cash or their attention) - established conveniences like self checkout and ATMs on the whole just do their job - the general public would NOT accept it any other way. It's a shame the general public don't share the same sentiment when it comes to more glamorous technology.

I did find a few things adventuring into the off topic in the video. Considering all the drama lately and certain opinions that always come out with threads on this person, I was thinking "oh no, people aren't going to like this" while watching, despite broadly agreeing with the substance of the message.

I think the confusion with passkeys comes from that fact that everyone wants to own you so you have to be mindful if this passkey is being stored on the OS, the browser, sync'd between devices through google or apple, etc.

Someone saying that work-life balance means all work and no life, and then producing substandard quality at said work seems worth pointing out.

A trillion dollar company vibe-porting a vibe-coded low quality product for clout/advertisement seems worth a call-out.

More outlandish conspiracy theories on hackernews...

You are in fact wrong - see the myriad of rules advertising, especially what can be advertised on children's TV.

What messages are not being allowed to be 'streamed into the brains of the population' exactly? Are you suggesting, for example, that claims made by the US president should not be shown on TV? Are you suggesting that these are not then analysed and scrutinised by people on TV?

I do not want E2E comms broken, but these posts on hackernews always bring out such outlandish claims.

You can't be applying the "mass control" claim for the attempts at stopping the spread of CSAM? So can you point to any evidence of wide spread "mass control" with Chat Control 1.0?

Why would you NOT want this to exist? This seems the only method to not raise false positives.