HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | egonschiele's commentslogin

Thanks for the response and it is encouraging to hear that there's more to this project than vibe coding! Sounds like some interesting things were found in the process, and I'm all for vibe coding as a way to learn new things.

Im not because nobody actually ever learns anything. For every one person that learns something the other 99% of the population gets lazier and dumber, ponder how that might play itself out.

This is probably the most harmful tech ever created simply because how many people trick themselves into thinking they're smarter while actually becoming much dumber. We're actually cooked.


It's exciting to see the speed gains. I use TypeScript every day on a large codebase, and it is too slow to run locally. I don't love this change though:

> However, frontier AI models can now do large-scale ports almost independently in a matter of days

> I wrote zero code. Not "barely any". Zero

So we are going to move from a carefully handwritten port to an entirely AI-generated port. I know this is the way the industry is headed, I use coding agents a ton. But I still review their output because they often don't make sound architectural decisions. Maybe this is a sign that my way of working is going away. I'm not sure how to justify that kind of time spent when someone can do the same thing in a matter of days with barely any effort.

I am working on my own language now, I've spent most of this year on it. The idea that someone could just replace it in a matter of days is wild. Wonder how the TS team at Microsoft feels about this.


> The idea that someone could just replace it in a matter of days is wild.

They didn’t design a language that millions of human engineers enjoy (?, lol) using. They took an existing codebase and ported it. Yes, the porting part is easier now but only because another project and spec exist.


While this is true - and I see the same sentiment as i am about to make ad nauseam - it is kind of amazing how far the goal posts have moved in such a short space of time.

It’s not a goal post. It was literally a fucking benchmark of the very first LLMs.

sorry, can please explain this? which benchmark are you referring to?

That's fair, I was thinking the same – porting must be simpler, especially if there's already a substantial test suite

If TypeScript has the integration testing framework in place to verify that the compiler actually works (and it should) - then, presumably, you should be able to swap in a Chinese Room black-box and - at least - know that it works.

You do have to be worried that it's possibly installing trojan horses on your computer while compiling code, or any other number of unwanted side effects.

But you can and should be able to have integration testing in place to know that a compiler - at a minimum - actually works.


Totally fair. The thing is, though, agents often write code in ways I don't expect, and I don't think any human would write, which makes me think that code may also break in a way that no human expects or would have written a test for.

Your way of working is definitely going away. And quickly. The idea of reviewing code today is already a questionable use of time. In a few more months to a year it will clearly be a waste of time.

The only group of people saying this are those who didn't have much technical ability to begin with.

Found the meat proxy. Your kind will be the first to be replaced. Useless without the machine doing the actual work of thinking.

You’re a waste of time.

This feels hard to maintain and keep up-to-date, but I would definitely use it! Great idea.

If an agent maintains it, is it hard? :D

If it’s so easy, then please ask it to make the globe stop glitching out and flashing on scroll.

yessir!

any update? It’s still glitching. I thought it was easy.

This takes me back! Right clicking works too, this is awesome. I miss property tables, that was a nice UX. Flash had it too.


This may be my favorite thing I have seen on hacker news. The art is spot on as well.


100% agree. Only thing is, as the last few years have shown, if you don't jump into the cesspit but a majority of your fellow humans do, it affects you anyway.


we also need time, energy. and care to make and tend to our own gardens. I see more and more people even with jobs try to go into various hustles just to make ends meet. Let alone those who aren't in work and pushed into NEET-dom.


I love Stephen's writing, and this is so well written.

> I was very wrong. The grift economy is massive. More disturbing still, it is participatory. A large and growing share of the population now appears willing to devote every waking hour to fleecing their fellow man as a career choice.

I find myself worrying about this a lot. For what it's worth though, the non-grifters, the people interested in building a community, are still out there. To find them, you need to look for groups that add no financial value – join an art club, volunteer locally. When I spend time with those groups, I'm reminded that not everyone's a grifter in real life.

Also, this explorable by Nicky Case is evergreen: https://ncase.me/trust/


> I love Stephen's writing

You mean you love Claude's writing.


I've followed Stephen for a while now, and I don't think this is Claude.


Well, I'm sorry to say, but you've been reading AI slop for a while now.

https://www.stephendiehl.com/posts/piranesi/

> Piranesi is the opposite: everything stripped to the bone, every sentence load-bearing.

Yikes.


you've got to be kidding me


I have been door knocking in a swing county in Wisconsin, and the first question we ask is, "what is the top issue you care about?" I've had one person say "the environment", and a couple have said, "what's happening in America right now." Almost everyone else answers "cost of living". So if you're waiting for things to change, you will be waiting a while.

Historically, something like 3.5 percent of the population need to be really engaged to make change happen, and the US isn't there right now, because we're all on our computers. The election coming up is an important one, so if you want to do something, start door knocking, become an election judge, sign up to be an observer at the polls, donate money. Indivisible is doing a lot of great, local, on-the-ground stuff, join your local chapter.


I think we gotta get people to see past the false dichotomy: part of their increased cost of living is due to climate change:

- your home insurance is more expensive b/c fire/hurricane/etc risk is worse in your state

  - and you probably don't have flood insurance but the risks there are worse too
- your electricity bill is worse b/c you're using AC more b/c it's hotter

- climate change does have healthcare impacts, including expanded geographic range of a bunch of vector-borne illnesses, as well as acute issues during heat events. Even if you're not directly one of these patients, your health insurance costs will increase in part due to these risks.

- replacing key infrastructure which is damaged by extreme weather is expensive

- during extreme weather events, your ability to earn may be disrupted

- and every business you spend at also has increased costs due to the same factors, which they pass on to you

It turns out that multiple generations of emitting without paying attention to the externalities has created literal costs that we _all_ now bear, and these costs will continue to increase.


The reason so few people care about climate change is that so few people truly understand it. They can see the grocery and housing bills, but CO2 in the atmosphere is some sort of invisible bogeyman to them, even though it’s a catastrophe waiting to happen.


Lots of people understand the problem and even then it's hard to get them to care because the personal harm vs utility balance is so uneven.

If I drive my car around today I contribute an infinitesimally small amount to the climate change problem while enjoying tremendous utility.


I did a bunch of door-knocking, for Obama and Clinton, and it didn't feel like I was doing any good. Everybody had long since made up their minds.

It's not like these are hard choices. Either you view the differences as stark and obvious, or you think that it's all the same (and I'm never going to persuade you otherwise). I don't think I garnered even a single vote, and quite a few expressed aggravation.

Is your experience different?


There are still swing voters and it is worth fighting for them! Also helpful to just remind people they need to vote. Typically, there is less turnout in midterms.


I’ve come to understand the inequality crisis (which manifests itself as a cost-of-living crisis for most people) as one of the root causes for the poly-crisis we are living through.

For climate change, I can totally understand how a household struggling to feed their kids will reject messaging of the form „oh and btw you also need to stop driving your car and heat your home lest the planet dies“. Of course they will revolt against that.

To me, fundamentally, the west MUST solve the inequality crisis first before we can ever hope of solving any of the other problems. People need slack to care about the environment, their neighbors, peace, etc.

And the other aspect of it is fairness - people rightfully look at the top, say „well the billionaires are jetting all around the globe and no one gives a fuck, why should I cut my holidays?“

We need to fix inequality first, and I project that most other issues we have today will magically resolve themselves.


Does anyone else feel incredibly nostalgic for the time when Bill Gates and Warren Buffet were the richest people on earth? I remember feeling pretty good about the fact that they were trying to do so much good, and about the giving pledge. Things feel so different now.


Few people were more vicious than Gates when he was running Microsoft. Maybe Larry Ellison but Gates was smarter and more cunning. I don't feel nostalgic about those days and Gates is just trying to buy his way into heaven and a positive view on his wikipedia page.


Classic example of Gate's avariciousness at the expense of others is:

https://www.folklore.org/MacBasic.html


> Gates is just trying to buy his way into heaven and a positive view on his wikipedia page.

That's gonna be really difficult as the heaven's manager probably have full access to the Epstein files.



When that was a thing, I could never forgive Bill for Windows ME.


But, where would you like to go today?


The Road Ahead.


No because Bill Gates was hanging out with Jeffery Epstein that entire time. I also feel like people forgot his insanely evil business practices from the 80s and 90s? Bill Gates has always been one of the worst people out there. Every bit as bad as Musk. It's a big club, we're just not in it.


It’s not that big of a club actually only about 100,000 people max

Carlin is God but that quote doesn’t actually make a lot of sense


I think 100k people for a club is pretty big. I interpret the Carlin quote to mean: "you're seeing a lot of people connected, you're not one of them". That the "club" is big enough that these connections regularly come up, is what I think he meant.


I think it just sounds the best for the point he was making and it makes the point well, I’m being intentionally pedantic in this space

One of Carlins hallmarks was the way he fine tuned his language, almost never was something he said on stage accidental or improv funny enough

So it’s genius in the fact that it conveys the point perfectly, while being quizzical in its formation



Hahaha what a moron

was that before or after he caught STDs?


Gates was a ruthless businessman who fought his way to a couple of monopolies and would have happily had a lot more if he could.


And what did they achieve?

It was mostly PR. Gates and Buffet were (and are) rich, but their money simply does not come close to the scale needed to fix the world's problems.

Gates is worth $110 billion. Global GDP is $126 trillion.


There was a lot of PR, but the money Gates and Buffet gave away, the foundations they created, the attention they drummed up for various charities and causes is certainly not to be scoffed at.

I'm sure they could have done more with less fanfare, but you seem to be setting the bar at "fixing the world's problems", which seems unfair. They have undoubtedly changed more lives than I'll ever manage to.


> M6 supports up to 32GB of unified memory to multitask across demanding apps and run LLMs on device for secure and private agentic tasks. It also provides up to 170GB/s of unified memory bandwidth — a 10 percent increase over M5 and a 2.5x increase over M1.

Isn't 170GB/s slow for bandwidth?


It is. That's the mac mini. For local LLMs you would want the Mac Studio, which tops out at 1.2TB/s.


It's higher bandwidth than any dual-channel DDR5 desktop machine, but Apple never quote the memory latency, so hard to compare otherwise.


Would that be a difficult comparison to do fairly sine one is SoC and the other isn’t?


I meant that it's a difficult comparison between platforms without having all the details like memory latency, how the memory controller load increases latency (can increase by 4x on some platforms), cache latency, TLB entries, etc.

Extremely high bandwidth is great for copying data, but not as relevant for walking chains of pointers, where latency/cache/TLB entries are more important.

So just saying "high bandwidth == better" is true when other variables are the same, but they rarely are, especially in comparison to x86-64 offerings.

All of these are independent that it is a SoC with on-package DRAM.


For max memory bandwidth you need to buy the Ultra versions (M5 Ultra: 1,2TB/s, this gets comparable to real GPUs regarding the memory bandwidth).


Kinda. Strix Halo does 256GB/s of memory bandwidth, and is significantly slower than an M5 Max (614GB/s). Feels like intentional market segmentation?


You can get the m5 pro in the Mac mini with 307GB/s at 64gb of memory it’s $2899


It's fast by computer standards and excellent for entry level chip. The Pro/Max/Ultra chips are always faster.

Compared to something like VRAM it's slow.


It's actually quite fast, more bandwidth than NVIDIA RTX 4090 at 1.0 TB/s according to https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/gpu-memory-... Compute power will still be different, though.


The thread you're replying to is asking about the 170GB/sec memory bandwidth of the base M6, not the faster spec of the Ultra chips.


You would want to get the M5 pro version with 307gb/s if you were interested in running local LLMs.


M6 and M5 Ultra both have comparable memory bandwidth per GPU core. I think they will perform well.


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

Search: