I have always only bought HomeKit compatible smart home devices as those have always worked offline. They also tend to just be much better than the general cheap crap that I see amazon pushing.
We’re going to pretend that these are the same concerns as an HOA squabble about wrong roofs? I like AI as a useful tool worth investing in but let’s not be dismissive about what people are actually mad about, because this dismissive attitude is exactly why SV finds itself where it is.
How many people have actually experienced a super loud data center, or a data center that's polluting their water supply, or polluting their air? To me the opposition seems to be 99% from people who are just talking about this because it's part of the zeitgeist right now.
Even the story you linked about the water supply, it was wastewater not drinking water. I'm not saying that it's good or even okay for wastewater to have bacteria in it. But if people en masse are against data centers because they "could pollute the entire town’s water supply," based on a singular case of one data center's wastewater having some bacteria, that gives me pause. This seems more like a trendy issue than a practical one for most people.
I don't think I agree with that but I think ads and slop you get from the "free" alternatives are more damaging in subtle ways that people don't appreciate. I also pay to remove ads from just about everything I use and am shocked at just how much better that makes my life.
(OP) I completely agree! AI is amazing at writing web apps that are full of bugs, but it also gives us what we need to turn that completely around. That's what we're trying to make happen...
>> It is possible now to reliably and automatically detect and fix every bug
which users are encountering on the web.
proceeds to give a trivial and then vague example related to usability, the first probably created by AI and the second a notoriously difficult problem to assess and solve for humans with context, let alone AIs...
The code I have dealt with from AI tends to be rather convoluted for the problems at hand and then become even more difficult to maintain. It has a place but I have been seeing it make code more difficult to understand, not less.
Convoluted code is definitely a problem, I don't think it's unique to AI though. It also becomes more manageable with a time travel debugger as the actual behavior is easy to understand.
Yep. I see it myself, both in other people's code, and our own. The _default_ behavior is a tendency to pile slop on slop, make poor architectural choices, slap bandaids on edge cases without considering the full ramifications, etc. This is more true if there isn't oversight or feedback, and also depending on model quality.
On the flip side: I personally use a strongly human-in-the-loop AI dev workflow [0]. Going back and forth on how much of that code I review myself (and I've found that AI code review frankly does a better job than _I_ do most of the time :) ). But, between staying hands-on, and the ongoing improvements in models, I've seen that the code my own agentic dev sessions produces is actually pretty high quality, and I've been able to clean up a lot of low-quality slop from unmonitored agent sessions. I've also been able to build some pretty major features from scratch and even execute massive migrations with excellent results, again by having me drive the work.
I actually just got done shipping Redux Toolkit 2.14 [1] with a massive set of bug fixes, and almost all of those were found by my agent researching the already-mature RTK codebase, at my direction, and identifying existing logic flaws or weaknesses. Once we knew what those bugs were, we could fix them.
Which, honestly, is the point of the blog post, of Replay QA as an automated testing product, and of Replay as a company in the first place.
Once you know what a bug _is_ and why it happens, fixing it is usually fairly straightforward. _Finding_ it is the hard part.
I've given a conf talk the last few years on "Debugging Software" [2]. One of the main points I make is that no one is _taught_ how to debug - we figure it out on the job as we go, because we have to ship. It's part of the job. But few people like doing it, and most people just want to slap in some console logs and call it a day. Very few people even use existing graphical debuggers (VS Code, Chrome DevTools, etc).
We built a time-travel debugger. The original idea was: make a DVR-style recording of a bug happening once, then you can dive in as deep as you need to investigate. Originally, that was supposed to be a human using the Replay DevTools UI - browser devtools with time travel debugging features built in. It's awesome, I wish I'd had it much earlier in my career :) But we found most people didn't want to spend time doing it themselves.
Earlier this year we shipped Replay MCP, which gives agents the same time-travel debugging capabilities: see hit counts for any line of code, dynamic logpoints and evaluations for every time a line of code ran, see the DOM tree or React component tree at any point in time. I built most of the React analysis features and MCP tools myself, based on my years of experience in the React ecosystem and maintaining Redux.
So, today you _could_ make a Replay recording of your app, point your agent at the MCP, and have it investigate. I've done that, and wrote some blog posts about how that helped my own agent find bugs in React itself and Next.js apps [3] [4]. I've seen my agent nail a bug from a recording on someone else's machine in <10min, starting from scratch.
We've productized that as Replay QA, so that you don't have to do any of the recording or setup - just point Replay QA at your app and repo and we do all the site analysis and recording and bug root cause investigation ourselves. Essentially, encoding our own expertise as debuggers, so you get the benefits [5]
So, back to the original point. Yeah, AI tends to crank out bad code by default, that code is buggy. We can't help your agent choose a better architecture. But we can help identify the bugs proactively, identify the root causes, and suggest solutions, based on the actual runtime behavior of the app. Up to you to get your agents to write _better_ code, but we can give your agent what it needs to fix the bugs it wrote :)
Nobody uses that expression to mean they would prefer to spend more, unless it's in the context where the number is so low that it implies a safety or fraud issue. e.g. "I would never buy a 5 cent burrito"
There's little point in spending more than $ 40,000 - especially for the crap currently being peddled in the U.S. I bought a 3-year-old electric luxury SUV with significantly under 20,000 miles for well under that.
I mean, if you're rolling in money, and don't need it for savings or more important purposes, you do you. But I'm with GP. 40,000 is excessive. Even in our devalued 2026 money.
Your median price new price is over double the cheapest new price, so no. EVs are now available out of the luxury car bracket in most markets. The cheapest car available on the Australian market was briefly a BYD EV. Not everyone wants to pay for heated seats or celebrity endorsements.
Not sure why you're throwing so much shade at people as though only poors would look at cars below forty thousand dollars. The 2027 Camry and the 2027 Escape both start at under $30,000. Tesla 3 is under $39,000.
Not everyone likes to blow 50-100 grand on an asset which loses 50% of its value in 3 years. Especially considering how much they're trending toward being so expensive to repair and unreliable that keeping it on the road after the warranty runs out is also expensive.
It's a thread about new cars. The price of a BYD car is a thing about cars, not about BYD cars. In fact, BYD is cheap compared to most comparable cars.
If a party was talking about running shoes, I wouldn't pipe in to say "I would never buy running shoes because I'm an amputee", because it's just completely outside the scope of the subject.
Cars are expensive and it's crazy, sure. But like, that's kind of just beside the point for the subject at hand.
i would love to spend >$100k on a great electric car, idk if they're quite there yet and the rocket boosters aren't doing it for me in the tesla line up lol
Still needs a step change upgrade on the battery tech
Nobody cares what you would personally spend on a vehicle. The point is that it's a very good value, relatively speaking, for a new vehicle of its class.
The person was asking me if I had seen a specific car and I gave them my reaction to that car. BYD has cars I want that they sell for ~$15k in China which look like a much better value to me.
I was in Montevideo this weekend and all car service cars I rode were Chinese EVs. They all seemed great and when I had Claude look up pricing they were all very well-priced. While I myself would loe a BYD Seagull or Dolphin, the more expensive ones like the Greely EX5 looked much cooler than much more expensive cars I see on roads in the US.
I live in Punta del Este, we just bought a Geely and a BYD (both) coming from a VW ID.3.
For BYD, a Dolphin 2027 for 21K + VAT. Insane value, by extreme far the best price-perf vehicle in the country’s history. Has every single little thing you might want. For that size and price, at least.
Notably, Tesla is attempting to destabilize the local market, coming in at 30K+VAT for the Premium Model Y which is cheaper than the US, Europe and pretty much anywhere.
I still prefer BYD by far, and not supporting the “controversial fellow”.
At a 20x electricity to gas price ratio (depending on factors, but yes), EVs are key here.
The tariff thing is a bit misleading if you're not familiar with the industry. Kia/Hyundai produce some of the "most domestic" vehicles on the market. Hyundai EVs were beating all American brands (incl. Tesla) by domestic content when the tariffs came into effect. Those lines are very well positioned to accommodate them.
The article is talking about a certain specialty model that's only produced in Korea, probably because it's low volume.
The reason is there's fierce competition between automotive companies in China.
Markets elsewhere that consolidated down to the 2 or 3 domestic champions that settled into a comfortable coexistence with their domestic "competition", and are coddled by protectionist government policy will have a hard time remembering how to compete for real.
That sounds quite reminiscent of America's auto industry, as well as the desktop computer, smartphone, web search, AI, fast food and supermarket industries too.
Is there a reputable summary that explains the cheaper sales price? I'm having a hard time believing it all boils down to politics, but there's way too much noise in the way.
An interesting explanation I heard is that China had this massive housing crisis that they never allowed to go Boom and clear the system in a few hard years. Instead the problems are lingering with an abysmal local credit market. This is why the local population can't/won't buy much and China either has to produce less or export more. For now they decided to export more to keep the machine going.
The bigger principal problem I have is that I do not understand how the Chinese economy/trade is supposed to work. China is working extremely hard to be completely self sufficient and not import anything. How is trade supposed to work if you do not want anything from your trading partners? What can they sell you besides sovereignty/land...
It will/is be a hard awakening when all those nations start to default/nationalize those projects. That is the point were usually the gunboats show up in the harbor....
Why BYD is cheap? They're heavily vertically integrated, they're ruthless about cutting production costs, they operate in an environment with more manufacturing talent than anywhere else, and they're a young company without many legacy costs.
What most folks in the USA don't understand, BYD manufactures two types of vehicles. One type is for the domestic market (cheaper and dangerous), the other is for export (meets some semblance of safety). I have heard that the export models are built to higher standards and are more dependable, hence the higher price than domestic models.
You are repeating years-old news by now. It’s true that the 2022 through 2025 model years had the ICCU problem, but they improved the ICCU design in 2026, with both better hardware (heavier duty power electronics) and better software (slow start for 12V charging).
Of course time will tell whether this brings failure rate down to be negligible. But I feel pretty confident.
It's not years old news, I was looking at used models and it still is an ongoing question. Having no real fix (time will tell if the 2026 revised part is reliable) and leaving owners with a potential brick (and re-servicing it again when the part dies) is completely unacceptable. Many Kia's were lemon'ed based on this issue.
Maybe I'm sensitive as I have a young child, but I will not buy a car with a known potential of stranding me.
If not, just don’t buy it. Let the free market sort it out. If the new part is proven to be good, the market will price these cars much higher, and sellers will perform a preemptive replacement to get higher resale value.
It should be noted that is for their E-GMP platform, which is their 800 V system. Their older 400 V platform, used on the Kia Niro and Hyundai Kona, has a completely different ICCU which has not had those problems. The first generation had some coolant leaks in the DC-DC converter housing and sometimes did a bad job keeping the 12 V battery charged but they seem to have got it all worked out for the second generation in 2024.
You need to go to China then. There are dozens of manufacturers other than BYD. It's astonishing just how many sexy EVs there are driving around in China.
20% happens about 1 in 5 times. I know that's snarky wording but 20% shots come though constantly in daily life.
I think as humans we are really bad at intuition about probabilities, and it being an election only makes it much worse. I don't think anyone is consciously conflating these with poll numbers but percentages of voters are the numbers we see a lot more than prediction markets, and 80% is idunno an 80% chance of getting between 50% and 54% of the vote or something.
It's not a 'prediction market', it's a gambling market. It's far more accurate to say 80% of gamblers were convinced Bolsanaro would win than to say there's an 80% likelihood he would win. It's not measuring likelihood as it's untethered from things that impact the actual results. Obscuring it basic gambling with the word 'prediction' doesn't change the fact that's naked gambling at the end of the day.
It's extremely inaccurate to say 80% of the gamblers were convinced because that's not how it works at all. Each bet has someone on the other side of it - 50% of the people bet on Bolsanaro and 50% against.
If you bet on 20% chances and they happen 30% of the time you make money. The payoffs are such that you win by being a better predictor than the market. I'm fine criticizing it as a gambling blight (not to mention a corruption payoff) but it is also a prediction market.
The 80% is not the proportion of people who think he would win, that's not how these things work.
Every single factor was pointing towards Bolsonaro, Polymarket was just consistent with that.
He unexpectedly won the first round of the election. His lead was expected to grow since he'd likely get most of the votes of the other candidates. 17 out of 18 polls favored Bolsonaro. Market movements indicated a strong expectation of him winning. The Brazilian Real futures are already down 10% in the last couple hours.
But that's how democracy works, I think this election will be studied many times in the future.
If he has an 80% chance to win that means Polymarket will be "wrong" 20% of the time. And 80% seems fair given he was leading in the polls by a razor thin but consistent margin.
Polymarket isn't binary so you are understating how wrong they were. Polymaket gives outcomes as percentage odds and less than 12 hours ago they had Bolsonaro by 5-to-1.
They are good at some markets but they don’t understand latam and especially Brazilian politics in the least so whatever makes it into the US news drives the market although it is normally wrong
reply