However, I agree with the reasoning. I don't see a future for visual workflow builders. They are used to define plumbings that can be defined by a 50 line python script.

A non-technical user does not need to draw this workflow. They can just ask an agent to write that code for them, to debug it, to visualize it. All workflow builders now have an AI chat where you ask the agent to build the flow for you. Why not skip the flow part?

I'm pretty biased though since that's the thesis behind what I am building.

COSS works well when there is a large distribution advantage of being OSS. This could be bacuse a large portion of users (need to) self-host the solution. This is true for databases, people will always need to self-host dbs (e.g. as part of their docker compose in dev, etc...). These people are also hard core engineers that will 1) talk about the db and 2) contribute to the project. So an OSS db have a large network effects and distribution advantage.

Posthog had a distribution advantage from OSS in their beginnings -- their beachhead was the self-hosting oss community. Now, it does not add much value -- It's unlikely Github adds much for their distribution. So, it does not make sense for them to do much more than just maintain it lightly. In fact, they try to push you from self-hosting by having great free tiers and startup programs.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48843014

Points: 3

# Comments: 1

That's a basic fact in bio. Check the rossman fold page for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rossmann_fold it's a template used for many functions.

Are there any folds and patterns that evolution evolution has not discovered that are also useful? I think Baker Group created a bunch of new folds. I'm not sure if they are as useful as the one discovered by Evolution. After all, Evolution had more compute power than us.

The only software that is as fast as TUI is the Zed IDE. Apparently they use Rust + their own built GUI toolkit with GPU rendering.

And apparently it's tightly coupled with Zed.

I think Andrej has the experience (and now ressources) to productionize this research into something very interesting.

p.s. called it

> Karpathy will help launch a new team focused on using Claude itself to accelerate pretraining research — an increasingly important frontier as AI companies race to automate parts of AI development. (https://www.axios.com/2026/05/19/anthropic-openai-karpathy-a...)

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47950575

Points: 94

# Comments: 41

I recommend to anyone visiting that part of the world.

> Two months ago, an email went out to a few hundred Delve clients informing them that Delve had leaked their audit reports, alongside other confidential information, through a Google spreadsheet that was publicly accessible.

Who leaked the audit reports? Who sent this email? Who is taking the time to write this analysis and kill the company?

In my opinion, the majority of the points in the article are no news. A compliance saas that offers templates for policies, all of them do. The AI is a chatbot, well who thought.

I think the main point is the collusion between delve and the auditors. Is the evidence for that clear?

"I don't fully agree with banning AI-edited comments. Using AI to improve readability and clarity is a reasonable thing to do. A well-structured comment is often much better than a braindump that reads like rambling. AI is quite good at this, and it will probably get better. To illustrate the point, here is how this comment would have looked if edited"