Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | dmortin's commentslogin

Does archive.is have problems? I tried this article with it and it didn't work:

https://www.wsj.com/business/entrepreneurship/burned-out-and...

Error: Invalid InterceptionId.


Since a few months archive.is is "unstable" from Spain. I thought the reason is the ISP but sometimes by just reloading it works... Can anybody shed some light?

Since a few months archive.is is unstable regardless of where I connect from, Spain or not. Are others not seeing the same thing? Maybe 20% of the times I try to use it the servers aren't responding.

Avoid those archive sites like the plague. They are not trustworthy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Archive.today_guidan...


At the bottom of that page FYI -

"Note: archive.org, or web.archive.org, run by the Internet Archive and the most-used web archive on Wikipedia, is uninvolved with and entirely separate from archive.today. Please keep using archive.org"


What’s your point? archive.is and archive.today are the same service.

My ISP blocks both and I’m not even in Spain.


"those archive sites" could be read two ways, and I read it as "sites which automatically archive the Internet" the first time. This is compounded by the fact that archive.org is the only one I knew existed until now, and I kind of assumed these were alternate domains or something.

They are the only reliable way for me to read proper news in Economist / FT / WSJ / WashingtonPost etc...

Well except paying $300 a month I guess.


its under 15$ a month...

Each. For over 20 of them.

Is that sarcasm, or do you really need 20 of them? I'm an avid news reader, and there is no way I could get through even a fraction of that number of news sources daily.

And isn't most major news covered by every one of the biggest news sources - one great source can accommodate the vast majority of news topics for someone, especially if they are on a tight budget.


> do you really need 20 of them ... no way I could get through even a fraction of that

We actually kind of need more than that. It is like here: we collectively select through ranking a number of pieces - but they are scattered (on a.com and b.org and c.info...).

I would also like to read through the whole of the Economist and the FT etc. - what we do instead is select what we read, and what we pick will come from many sources.


How do you know which ones Hacker News is going to link to?

Except you cannot know if the system has tampered with the content you think is genuinely from those sites.

Fucking sucks, what's the alternative for people without money or people who the papers/businesses don't allow them to do subscribe because of the country they're from/in?

Use sources such as PBS, NPR, etc. - they are available globally, and there are non-US-based sources if readers prefer.

Sources that.... don't post the things people are trying to read?

Besides, if it's free, you're the product.


Tried searching for the submission article or even a mention of this event on their websites but I found nothing. Are you sure these are actually faithful replacements of everything that archive.is/.today unlocks for people? It's a lot of paywalls they remove, lots of stuff isn't reported elsewhere.

> They are the only reliable way for me to read proper news in Economist / FT / WSJ / WashingtonPost etc...

> Well except paying $300 a month

It looks like the WSJ is available for $2/mo or the WaPo for $2.50 mo. You probably don’t need all of them simultaneously as they frequently cover the same topics, including pretty much all of the big news stories - subscribe to one for a year then switch to another. And even if you aren’t subscribed to all of them you are still contributing in a small way to keeping good journalism alive.


I am already subscribed to 2 papers in my own country at ~$50 total since one comes in print once a week.

Just a matter of priorities.


My reply was to help the grandparent commenter who said "They are the only reliable way for me to read proper news". If you already have multiple paid news subscriptions that are working great for you, you can ignore my suggestions. Edit: Ah, you were the grandparent commenter who said "They are the only reliable way for me to read proper news."

You get the right to say this when you make a better one. Otherwise, you're just telling people to stop accessing information.

It's different by location. E. g. in Europe many people uses Facebook, many under 40s too.

In the US: 25–34 years: Around 25.7% to 25.9% (the largest single demographic group).


Central Europe here myself (Switzerland to be precise) signal and telegram are the dominant IM and Instagram is just as dead as Facebook, sure some might use it but nobody expects anyone else to to.


Signal is not the most popular/dominant IM even in Signal's HQ. It has 2% global market share. You are extrapolating from your bubble.


Maybe the robot won't take all the jobs, but they may take many jobs. Those masses won't be happy if some of the people will still have jobs.

And BTW, 75 year olds doing physical labor is not an ideal state of things unless that plumber really wants to work at 75.


In the future the product itself will be implemented by the end of the meeting.


Yet it will still take just as long to get the code tested and approved in production by the SME.


> What's left for humans to do? Live on UBI, explore this wonderful world, colonize other planets..

If AI is so good then why would feeble humans travel to other planets? AI will use robots to discover them which don't need food, sleep, etc.

Humans on UBI will have a basic existence. UBI does not mean everyone will live in luxury, since luxury housing, locations are limited, so you'll get some simple aparment, simple food and bus tickets.

Evrything else will be luxury which those can get who can still be valuable in the system due to some unique skill.


If it does not gain traction then it's irrelevant in the global software field.

You can have fun with it, but it won't make a difference, so from the point of view of the software market it won't exist.


Do you hold the same opinion with regards to Jonathan Blows jai language?


> Software Engineering as science will be largely dedicated to AI development

Which will require fewer people.

Simple software engineers who work on CRUDs and are not PhD-s and stuff will go away. Most of software is like this. The few percent who work on kernels, AI models, etc. will still have work. The rest won't, or rather much less people will be needed to simply use AI to do that work.


Yep. The CRUD-ish part of CS is gonna end up like the typewriter pools from the '60s. Claude code is already way better than most subcontractors I've worked with, and without any weird interpersonal or contractual issues usually associated with whatever sketchy agreements their employers have with my employers.

I can see the ground crumbling in a linear fashion, moving straight towards my direction. In a sense, I've already made peace with that. I know what my skill ceiling is.

I'm decent enough to work on an ecommerce, customer portal or whatever. I'm also fully aware I'm never going to be able to write a kernel module, improve some low level loop in a database runtime in C, or do some sophisticated data analytics or fluid simulation modeling.

My time as developer is nigh. I won't really miss it one bit, to be honest.

Honestly I've been thinking about moving into hospitality, tourism or any other field where AI as zero chance of being able to make a serious dent. At least until robots will be able to give an interactive guided of a museum or a national park.


Sometimes I feel the same but then I sit in a refinement meeting and have to handhold the stakeholders through the process of finding out what they actually want, what they don't want, which trade offs they find acceptable and which they don't. And while AI is infinitely patient, my feeling is that being good at this is a super individual people skill and I know that more often than not the people I am talking to are kind of happy they are talking to a person instead of a machine. However when it comes to actually implementing the stuff, AI reliance is now necessary with the timelines given.


But right now AI assisted development isn't really making you more productive by an order of magnitude. It's easily a game of whack-a-mole right now. I estimate that an excellent programmer equipped with Claude Code only sees a 30-40% improvement in speed right now

What you speak of may happen, but I doubt it will happen in the next 10 years.


Judging from the rate of improvement in AIs it will happen gradually over the next few years.

Comparing AIs of a few years ago to the ones today there is a good chance they will improve enormously.

Some humans will always be needed for handholding, but not as many as employed today to churn out run of the mill code.


Sure that's a theory that sometimes plays out, but similarly one also sees almost exponential growth or improvement, yet followed by a plateau for a long time until the next breakthrough.


Software engineering has been getting more efficient for decades and over that time there’s been a massive increase in the number of software engineers.

The Mythical Man-Month describes teams of ten engineers operating before the Internet. Today (pre-LLMs) that’s probably 1-2 people.


Isn't it expensive, though? If you let it perform gui or web tasks for you using vision, I'd think it consumes lots of tokens.


Depends how much you are using it - for a casual user the $20 tier gives you just about enough use for hobby projects etc.

Or if you are doing full time development then you just need to pony up for the 20x tier if you want to use it.

Running Codex locally removes so much friction and is so fast compared to either running it on the web (where it has to build environments online etc which consumes time) or compared to copy-pasting chatgpt that it's just a no-brainer.


I don't know about Chatgpt but I used Kimi (they have a Chinese-only plugin that does desktop control - works fine if you enable it even if you don't know Chinese). Observing how it works, it's mostly using the accessibility features of the user interfaces - it fetches a sort of DOM for the desktop applications. Only rarely it has to take a screenshot.


Do you actually get any signifcant AI traffic today?


Yeah, maybe like 10:1 bot to human traffic. I'm just a rando blogger so I have principally machine readers - which is not a thing I mind. But I do use Cloudflare everywhere and I could just as well have PEBKACked a setting somewhere to block the traffic. Amusingly, I used to have like 100x the readers in the 2000s posting just as inane takes. I've been left behind by the refinement of the craft!


Are open weights models secure? E.g. if a Chinese model is run by an American provider then can it still do bad things, like inserting backdoors into generated code or accessing external URLs (if browsing is enabled) to send info to them?

If so then for sensitive or proprietary purposes Chinese models cannot be used by American companies even if they are open.


What prevents an American model from doing the same? They’re all black boxes.


Nothing, but the article is about American AI, so using Chinese models by American companies can be risky. And it's risky for the Chinese to use American models.

So every country or block needs to run their own models to avoid opening a security hole for other countries.


And to provide "correct" answers to questions like "island of Taiwan belongs to which country". It seems that there is not single agreed point of view on national borders.


Technically nothing, legally a lot more.


A model absolutely could be trained to engage in malicious behavior like that, but it seems impractical for an actual attack. What you want as an attacker is to insert a backdoor exactly where you want it an not where you don't because every backdoor increases your chance of getting caught. A malicious model inserts backdoors and exfiltrates data everywhere and you care about maybe 0.01% of it. The other 99.99% is negative value to you. In practice this malicious model would be caught almost instantly.

A hosted model is different because you could prompt inject specific customers, but I assume from this question you mean a malicious open source model being hosted by an honest provider.


I think we'll pretty quickly see a best practice emerging that any generated code will be subject to an additional pass scanning for vulnerabilities. The scan will be done by a different model than the one that created the code. That will help catch vulnerabilities created by models, whether intentional or not.

This should be done regardless of which model was used - American or otherwise.


I would say you should assume your models are constantly being attacked by various forms of prompt injection. By that token (puns) if you treat all models as adversarial you’d probably taking a very sane approach. That said - evidence of this sort of thing should be easy to find and report on. The fact we haven’t seen it leads me to believe it is not there.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: