They could well use the data from their own developers, couldn't that be enough?

~2015, "DevShare". They wrapped open-source software downloads with opt-out adware and PUPs (potentially unwanted programs), without the original developers' consent in some cases. They took over abandoned/unmaintained projects (like GIMP for Windows, VLC, etc.) and replaced the original download with their adware-wrapped version.

Note that it's meaningless to call out "PUPs" as that category includes many things that are developed and distributed on sourceforge, like torrent clients.

Maybe that will force the companies to not be allowed to just lock you out of the account.

Ya, sorry, no, maybe is not really a durable position here.

You, your siblings, your parents, etc, etc.

> Oh and he pays engineers $500,000 to spend $250,000 on Claude tokens.

What he said was that if he's paying 500,000 for an engineer, he expects that engineer to spend at least 250,000 in tokens, to get the most out of those $500,000.

Basically that it would be counterproductive to hire a top tier engineer and restrict his token usage to let's say $200 or $500 a month.

I think he's right on this.

> Basically that it would be counterproductive to hire a top tier engineer and restrict his token usage to let's say $200 or $500 a month.

That's not what he said, though. He gave a number, and that number happens to correspond to something on the order of 25 billion Opus 4.6 tokens (hard to say what input vs. output ratio is like). He also said he is currently "deeply alarmed" if his engineers don't spend that much.

This is very likely not true.

What is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence.

(The form in which Christopher Hitchens actually stated "Hitchens' Razor" is more symmetrical but unfortunately wrong: "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence". Anything can be asserted without evidence! It's only when something actually has been, in a given context, that dismissing it is -- in the same context -- a reasonable course of action.)

While a reasonable principle I don't think it applies in context. People aren't expected to exhaustively source comments on HN. There's subjective etiquette to it.

In this case it would be reasonable to inquire about the basis of the original remark, or to reject based on personal knowledge, or to reject based on a concrete citation. But an arbitrary non-technical vibes based rejection doesn't fit with how things generally work here.

True but you can provide evidence to increase the quality of your claim.

> You could do 30 seconds of research

So could you, right?

The use of thermal paper was surprising. Great idea, indeed.

@sama's did say: "[..] will not be used to independently direct autonomous weapons in any case where law, regulation, or Department policy requires human control". Law is what Trump decides.

> Putting a fake case report on GitHub wouldn't make it any less fake.

Much easier to review for whomever wants to review it.

Do you know what a case report is?

Would it be easier, though? Medical records (in the US) are covered by HIPAA and, to my knowledge, there is no anonymized canonical record, similar to what we have for legal decision. Without that, how difficult would it be to just "make shit up"?

Obviously just sending it via email to the reviewers works just fine in practice anyway, the problem is really that they published a summary piece about research that was later retracted, but didn't take down their own article.

I want my local dm shop to offer me their product info as copyable markdown, ingredient list, and other health related information. This could be a way to automate it.

Since you didn't say what a "dm shop" is, I'll assume you mean "dungeon master shop" where you buy Dungeons and Dragons-y stuff.

Or maybe it's a "direct marketing shop", where you bring flyers to be delivered into people's mail? Yeah, that must be it.

Given that it's about food or medicine somehow, because of the mention of ingredients lists and health-related information, it's probably https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dm-drogerie_markt (usually abbreviated "dm").

(I didn't know about that either before now.)

He probably means the large German drug store chain called DM.

https://www.dm.de/

Why would you want that over a proper API with structured data?

How does my chatbot use the API if not through MCP?

Welcome to a new generation of developers (not by age) who wants unstructured word slop markdown instead of clear jsons. People's brain are turned to a mush because they no longer think in a logical way, that's the LLM's job.

@grok Is this true?

"unstructured word slop markdown"

Where's the issue? In this case there's no difference between a structured markdown and a structured JSON document for an LLM.

What's wrong with a nutrient table in markdown?

If Markdown can be used for LLMs and JSON can be used for LLMs and other purposes too, JSON is better, right?

dm?

> will not be used to independently direct autonomous weapons in any case where law, regulation, or Department policy requires human control

That says it all. Those laws get issued the same way the tariffs did.