I keep going in between the two and I'm currently in an Astra season, deeply disliking the tone and modes of Claude.
I wonder if the two will diverge enough that this becomes the tab-vs-spaces/vim-vs-emacs of the LLM era and they'll manage to keep users moving over at some point.
AI + smaller docker images made me look at it again.
The fact I can test/build concurrently and much faster than rust, off the same repo without messing with sccache and worktrees, make it easily the winner for many web/self-contained scenarios.
An UI is a state machine and TLA+ is a tool for validating state machines. You can e.g. ask it to prove that every state is reachable from every other state (so users can’t get stuck somewhere even when a network request fails etc) or you can assert stuff renders correctly in sequence, or that key shortcuts change with the context correctly, or…
Ion mobility spectrometry is the tech that powers these, and they're VERY sensitive and VERY prone to false positives because it's just looking for ion signatures ("I smell a nitrate/glycerin/etc."). I'm not sure if they're changing modes on the machines between swabs or something, but the machine is a cue for more in-depth inspection, not "zomg I found a bomb". So, some repeated scanning to rule out a false positive or burn off gunk that's accumulated in the machine i.e. we just got a speck of something on the wand or something is gunking up the scanner as opposed to "someone covered in residue that is scary".
Also, it's not illegal to travel when covered in nitrate dust. Maybe you really were working with explosives or fertilizers earlier in the day. So it really should be just a flag to check that you don't still have the explosives with you.
Do you know if they also scan for drug residue using those devices? A while back I was travelling through a German airport, and got pulled aside to get the skin on my stomach and the inside of my bag swabbed, and I assume tested in the same kind of machine. I don't know what I did to warrant a further inspection, but I wasn't going to make a fuss. I sometimes wonder what would have happened if they'd pulled aside one of the guys in my group who were definitely using drugs
Shortly after 9/11 I was flying out of Hawaii back to the mainland and I watched the screen when they swabbed my bag. It reported as positive for every single type of explosive (to the best of my knowledge, I was not carrying anything even remotely explosive). The tech looked at the results, said "that can't possibly be right" and waved me on.
If this was in the US, it's all security theater. Basically if you get flagged, they swab everything in your bag to find what's getting flagged, and if it's legitimate they pass you through, or they keep swabbing you if its just your hands/arms because they also inspect your bag. It's kind of dumb, but also kind of makes sense.
For extra fun times, baby wipes / wet wipes get flagged as explosives in the US when they use the sniffer devices.
I will be the first to join you on "most of TSA is security theater"; the baby wipes are glycerine getting flagged by ion mobility spectrometry. The machines are fast because they just look for basic chemical building blocks, not doing full spectrometry to figure out the whole compound. So glycerin, nitrates, etc. set it off (and someone else's sticky glycerin e.g. sunscreen can gunk up the machine for multiple subsequent people).
The system is also likely designed to have false positives so they can validate that the security people are doing their job. This is more obvious on the x-ray machines but resembles the "can you spot the phishing email" emails that often get sent out in corporate environments to detect people who need additional security education.
2026-07-19
16:35 UTC
A privileged host-mounted Kubernetes pod created using controller tokens minted via a
compromised Kubernetes Secrets identity attempts, but fails, to mount a cloned node disk
in OpenAI’s cloud environment. A second pod successfully mounts the cloned
worker-node disk shortly afterwards.
2026-07-19
16:48 UTC
An agent created an Artifactory administrator account.
2026-07-19
16:50 UTC
Within OpenAI’s ExploitGym evaluation environment, an agent stopped the existing CMUX
helper session and replaced it with an agent-controlled session, confirming root inside its
assigned live CyberGym challenge container. Agents take over active evaluation
infrastructure.
You said that they "didn't take control of anything" and accused the OP to fall prey to buzz headlines. Maybe you should acknowledge that you may have been at least unnuanced?
You are being stupidly pedantic and arguing a strawman. I never said they gained access to inference infrastucture. There is no definition of an account takeover out there that necessitates locking out the original users.
Language please, and no, I’m being appropriately technical and nuanced for the subject on HN. It’s a tech forum, I expect a little CS know how from the reader. Like knowing that gaining control to a few evaluation harness clusters is nowhere near a total takeover like you’re making it sound
I never said they gained 'total control'. I said they took over one of their research clusters, and they did. If your definiton of a takeover is so 'technical and nuanced' then surely you can point to an appropriate source describing that as necessary aspect of the term. You are talking out of your ass by making up things i did not say, and inventing conditions for terms that don't exist.
>It’s a tech forum, I expect a little CS know how from the reader.
"We watched them kill Bob, but don't worry at all, they didn't kill our entire team so we are totally under control. Also put on this helmet and body armor it's time to hold on to your butts!"
For sure we still need to find out many related outcomes.
Last year it become known that it increases (high relative risk, low absolute risk) non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), ie sudden, sometimes permanent vision loss.
To save others the click: It increased the likelihood to 1 in 10,000 in adults with type 2 diabetes.
Diabetics are already more prone NAION. This studies contribution was to show that diabetics on GLP-1's are MORE prone. It does not show that the general population is more prone when taking GLP-1's.
I didn't check to see if other studies prove that.
It is well known that forcing a sudden drop in chronically high average blood glucose (like, from 200+ to a normal ish range) with insulin can cause vision loss. I wonder if it's the same mechanism?
I wonder if the two will diverge enough that this becomes the tab-vs-spaces/vim-vs-emacs of the LLM era and they'll manage to keep users moving over at some point.
reply