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

That's only realistic if nobody ever looks at what the code changes were.

This is already the world we live in. Lots of people are shipping code that they've barely looked at. Not saying I support it, but it's true.

Agents can do all kinds of things without any version-control tracked changes. Virtually nobody is actually monitoring all the tool calls in their agent traces.

Oh you sweet summer child

> Maybe in the future, programs and custom made hardware might be the same :)

One step closer to the matrix. Send the white rabbit over, I've got your floppies ready to go. No ai, and developed without an active internet connection, so you can listen to music safe in the knowledge that your music isn't listening to you.


They can't sue everyone, comrade. AI tools will hopefully trigger a rewrite of what copyright means, it's always been silly that it prevents derivitive works.

> AI tools will hopefully trigger a rewrite of what copyright means,

Maybe it will, but this ain't a copyright issues, it's a trademark issue.


It's a legal issue, and the legal part has always been bullshit regardless of which specific label happens to apply.

> It's a legal issue, and the legal part has always been bullshit regardless of which specific label happens to apply.

You are so far off-base I dunno if you're being sarcastic or serious.

Sure, Copyright might be bullshit, but Trademark is not!

Copyright protects the creator, trademark protects the consumer[1]. I sure hope that you aren't suggesting reducing consumer protections :-/

----------------

[1] When a consumer buys a trademarked product, like Coke, or (in this case) Starcraft, they know what they are getting. If you remove trademark protections, then anyone can sell anything as anything else! For example, you would be able to bottle colored water into exact-replica Coke bottles, with exact same labelling, and you would be able to do it legally.


If you don't make copyright contagious under derivative works then people can just change a few things to get around copyright.

Also, do you really want a world where big film studios can just adapt books of writers without compensating them?


Is 20-30 authors per year making it big really worth the massive suffocation that prevents tens of thousands of authors from writing the stories that are in their hearts?

> Is 20-30 authors per year making it big really worth the massive suffocation that prevents tens of thousands of authors from writing the stories that are in their hearts?

I'm not sure if this is sarcasm, but just in case it isn't: I don't think anything is preventing people writing the stories in their hearts.


They do that anyway today. You really think authors, book writing being the lucrative industry for writers that it is, are suing Universal/Sony/whoever to prevent their IP being infringed?

I do really want a world however where fans/communities can riff on and make derivative works of culturally relevant material without being legally nuked from orbit. The last few weeks have been amazing in the gaming world, creativity abounds and there seem to be no limits as to what we can redesign to our own whims.


Surprised to see this level of discourse here on HN, reads like a reddit comment.

Copyright sucks, and Disney is bad etc, but how is using StarCraft and its assets in your random AI game okay?

I mean, creators should be allowed to exert control over how their assets and brand are used.


I've always found that defending laws that don't benefit people to be a stange attitude on a place called "hacker news".

Creative people should be able to create. Trademark/copyright laws, protecting assets for the great-grandchildren of who actually created the art, has never been a positive. The only people who benefit, are themselves not creative (or else they would create, instead of defending "rights" and "image").


> I've always found that defending laws that don't benefit people to be a stange attitude on a place called "hacker news".

Trademarks benefit people - see my explanation in a different response to you.


How about protecting assets for the people who made the art in the first place, geeze.

And seriously wtf why shouldn't, like, Jack Kirby's grandkids get a share of the huge bounty of stuff he created for Marvel, but Elon Musk gets to inherit emerald mines from his dad?


You two are arguing over a timeframe.

Limit IP laws to 20 years.

Humans go from birth to being released into the public domain as an adult in roughly that time. Why are ideas somehow not in the Public Domain after a generation has grown up?

That way Jack Kirby gets to make his money. Jack's kids can live off his money. But Jack's ideas are free to use after doing their time.


IP has very low marginal cost, emeralds don’t.

IP is not scarce, in the sense that you can have your own intelectual product that does the same than others, and you having and using an idea don't limit other people ability to have and use similar ideas. But one emerald mine is just one, and only one person can extract from it at any given time. Thus property laws as a replacement of stick-and-stone laws take place.

If you feel that your idea is worth IP protection, just protect it as a trade secret, not as a patent or copyright. Very famously Disney have a copyright over drawing three close circles.


>Copyright sucks, and Disney is bad etc, but how is using StarCraft and its assets in your random AI game okay?

Because it's cool.


The number of conglomerates has, unsurprisingly, continued to shrink. It's long overdue for a rethink. Maybe if the US political system ever stabilizes, we might get to it in a hundred years. Until then Copyright sucks and Disney is bad.

>but how is using StarCraft and its assets in your random AI game okay? How is it not ok? What is the issue exactly? From what I can tell it's totally free, and has an indication it is a fan game on the bottom of the screen.

> How is it not ok? What is the issue exactly? From what I can tell it's totally free, and has an indication it is a fan game on the bottom of the screen.

Trademark violation. Trademarks protect consumers, not producers. Surely you can't be advocating for relaxing consumer protections?


Except it's not claiming to be official content and I don't see how it is harming anyone, or do you think the letter of the law is more important than the spirit of it?

If you’re not charging anything for it it’s free press for the original content creators imho

> creators should be allowed to exert control over how their assets and brand are used

I hate to be glib, but no they shouldn't.

Creators should be allowed to create things and sell them. No one, whether the creator, or the company the creator worked for when they first created the thing, should be able to stop someone else from creating something.


> I hate to be glib, but no they shouldn't.

See my sibling reply elsethread - you really don't want to be advocating for reducing consumer protections. You think you are advocating for a reduction in producer protections, but trademarks protect consumers, not producers.


> Creators should be allowed to create things and sell them.

I'm in two minds over this.

In a free for all, money wins. No small-money creator would get to profit from a truly great idea. Someone with more money simply copies it, builds it bigger/faster/better-logistics with more market budget.

At least let the creator sign over rights to their idea - even if the terms are unfair.

But once an object is in your hands. It should be free for you to do what you want with it for yourself. Deadmau5 legalities over his purrari should not be a thing.


argument of a child

if you feel so strongly about it share your wifes face so we can make pornos with it


> it's always been silly that it prevents derivitive works.

For example though, if you spend two years writing a novel and I change one word of it and sell it for half what you do, isn't that a problem?


100% a problem. but tight legal regulations never really work long term when technology overpowers it. AI is clearly exposing how fragile IP/copyright is and something a lot more extraordinary needs to exist for it to work properly. Perhaps cryptography related

When it comes to copyright, I am not so optimistic. When the AI bubble bursts, the usual corporate interests will resurface with a vengeance.

Couldn’t they just use AI to sue at scale? No one should be too small to go after now.

The court system is too bogged up as it is with the current load. So I guess we’d have to create some AI judges and lawyers :p

And robotic cops to enforce the law!

Yeah the law firms just haven't caught up yet. But they will.

And when the judges get around to the case in 300 years after all the other ai court cases, we'll be beyond caring about the consequences.

Law firms are cautious about AI tools, they got burned a couple years ago by hallucinated citations.

Citing made-up cases sure looks like lying to the court, which is a punishable offense. Lawyers have been sanctioned, fined, and in one case received a 30-day license suspension.


Luckily(?) Office is browser based now.

I mean... You can open Office documents in the browser, but for anything beyond basic tasks it's not even close.

For most users it is enough. I know a number of companies that nowadays only provides the basic office365 license to their employees (which disable access to desktop apps) for cost saving reasons. They only provide the full license to a small subset of administrative users who are totally irrelevant in an OpenBSD related discussion as they would use windows or MacOS desktop anyway.

its not enough tho. because even the most basic of users still need to open and edit files from advanced users.

recent only office builds are not quite there, but far superior to office Web.


I honestly thought there wasn't even an offline installer anymore, and office.com was the only way to open documents in office these days.

The typical Office installer is a small bootstrapper that requires an Internet connection to download required files, but applications themselves are native and work offline (some features and applications use web tech for UI, of course).

Subscription-based licensing requires periodic check-ins, but perpetual product key-based licensing is available, though compared to the subscription versions, the release cadence for new features is slow.

The online component of traditional apps like Excel works best as a means for sharing documents, with the web UIs useful for reading and light editing, and the same documents fully editable in the native apps.


The proposed rename breaks the HOMES (Huron, Ontario, Michigan, Eerie, Superior) acronym all of us in Michigan learned, and is thus doomed to failure. Because SHAME is a much worse acronym.

Just because you are not the target audience, does not mean the company has no income.

Just because a company "has income" doesn't mean it's a viable business lmao

> No, it wasn’t a Nazi salute

Talk all you want, but video is available for you to make up your own mind. Imo, it was very obviously a Nazi salute coupled with an angry face reminiscent of Hitler, and then repeated to make sure it was seen.


But is any of that comment inaccurate or incomplete?

We (the usa) can choose to leave at any time. Crying about the effects of your own actions while choosing not to fix it is madness. Don't push your madness on the rest of us

It was deeply stupid for us to start an unnecessary war with Iran, but it's not clear that we can leave any time. Iran is suggesting they will charge fees to traverse the strait, (and attack shirkers) and it's also not clear that Iran has the remaining navy to successfully clear the mines.

It was incredibly stupid to start this war, but we're now fairly well stuck.


> Iran is suggesting they will charge fees to traverse the strait,

That's perfectly fine. Let freedom of navigation end. The United States uses its natural resources to wreak havoc on the world, why shouldn't countries gifted with Geography not push their advantage? Particularly when there is no world order and US bombs anyone it wishes whenever it wants? Why should Iran play nice when all it got in return is US aggression? Why should any State adhere to international law when the law is only applied when it's beneficial to the world powers?


Despite the local US politics, it's not really the US which is primarily hurt by Iran cutting off the straight. It affects Europe and Asia much more.

For reference the number #1 affected country is the US. It just consumes so much more oil per capita then anyone else and unlike some other countries can't close it's oil import/exports due to logistical reasons.


Then let the other aggrieved parties take it up with Iran

The market for oil is global and so is the price. Supply and demand.

> The United States uses its natural resources to wreak havoc on the world, why shouldn't countries gifted with Geography not push their advantage? Particularly when there is no world order

You can push an advantage, but the whole "no world order" issue will result in severe repercussions if you start to mess with the wrong people. This is not unique to America.

> US bombs anyone it wishes whenever it wants?

Oh please.

> Why should Iran play nice when all it got in return is US aggression?

Iran playing nice? Are you serious? You know that it's possible to criticize America while not backing a government that has killed at least 40K of its own citizens _this year_. Acting like Iran and its government are somehow passive in global conflicts is insane.


> that has killed at least 40K of its own citizens _this year_.

This number is made up propaganda, stop referencing it as a fact.


> According to Kerry, Netanyahu had presented presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden with plans to attack Iran, all of whom refused, before he received an affirmative response from current US President Donald Trump.

https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-892647


> Oh please.

I mean, between bombing fishermen, Iran during negotiations (twice), kidnapping president, threatening Greenland, supporting far right worldwide, supporting Putin, supporting genocide in Gaza a lot more then any other country, supporting far right where possible ...

The fact is, Iran was not attacking Hormuz. Iran was abiding international agreeemets which USA broken. Iran is not nice country, but they had policy of strategic restraint and did not even responded to first negotiation bombing.

The biggest threat to global stability right now is USA. Because the country is violent, crazy and still have a lot of power.


Iran is far from innocent and did respond to the 2025 attacks by launching missiles so not sure why you’re claiming otherwise. Iran has been lying about nuclear ambition for decades and funding terrorist groups. Do you want another crazy country to have a nuclear weapon? Russia and DPRK already threatening everyone with nuclear

> You can push an advantage, but the whole "no world order" issue will result in severe repercussions if you start to mess with the wrong people. This is not unique to America.

You don't have to tell me. America and Americans are feeling the effects of no world order in our diesel prices. For the record, I am in favor of having a world order with international law that is enforced and applied to all countries *equally*.

> Oh please.

Great argument. /s

> Iran playing nice? Are you serious? You know that it's possible to criticize America while not backing a government that has killed at least 40K of its own citizens _this year_. Acting like Iran and its government are somehow passive in global conflicts is insane.

Get off your moral high horse. I am an American, my issue is with the AMERICAN government. I am not condoning what Iran does or did to its people. What they did is their business. Does not justify what we did to them and have been doing to them for ages.

Why is Iran not allowed to have nuclear capability when Israel is allowed? Why is our president a pedophile? Why does our government protect other pedophiles? Why is corruption legal in America? Why do we pay for the genocide in Gaza? Why do we support the deranged Israeli state militarily and financially?

> Acting like Iran and its government are somehow passive in global conflicts is insane.

Our government is bought and paid for by foreign entities like AIPAC and corporations the people be damned. Do you think this gives China/Russia just cause to bomb America?

America is the most belligerent nation in the world, all you have to do is take your head out of the sand and count the number of wars America has been in in the last 50 years.


Iran doesn't control the strait unilaterally. Does Oman not get a say in this?

If they build mine-laying boats and their own missiles, yes.

Seems like they do right now

When you do things like assassinate a head of state at home along with this daughter and grandchild, double-tap strike a school because AI told you so, and sink a navy show ship at sea without waiting to rescue survivors, you can’t then cry about international law and norms of sea navigation.

This feels completely oblique to the parent's comment.

Because, given the context of the discussion and the flow of back and forth (for/against Iran’s move on the strait), then the parent is most likely using Oman’s role as a roundabout “look how Iran isn’t respecting international law” rather than a legitimate concern for Oman.

But if you want an answer to the same question but posed with legitimate curiosity, the answer is Oman is OK with this arrangement :)


You clearly did not understand my point.

The strait of Hormuz has multiple pathways going through Iranian and Omani waters. Iran is "free" to charge a toll, assuming they are okay throwing out centuries of international law relating to freedom of the seas.

Considering vessels can just transit through Omani waters, what good would charging a fee do? Everyone would just sail on the western and southern side of the strait and traverse freely.

So for the Iranian fees to ever be collected, either Oman would need to charge similar fees (so there is no way around a fee), or Iran would have to attack vessels in Omani territory.

For the record, Oman signed the No Fees/No Tolls pledge with the rest of the EU literally two days ago.

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/pledge-maintaining-integrity...


> centuries of international law

Did they sign an agreement to adhere to this "law"? And if they did, what were the cited consequences of breaking it?


No, I got your point.

Ultimately, when international law devolves into “might is right”, expect your adversaries to apply the concept as well. Iran has always been the de facto operator of the strait (by fact of being the strongest regional power bordering the strait), and this will remain going forward. Nitpicking how and why Iran is doing this is not going to change the reality on the ground. It is better to spend energy on preventing wars of aggression of this nature from reoccurring :)

So long story short, is it legal for Iran to restrict access to the strait via Omani waters? Nope. Is there a realistic way to prevent it from doing this by force? Also no. Did Iran wake up and decide to arbitrarily take over control of the strait? Absolutely not. Would Iran be willing to revert to pre-war state if their demands are met? Perhaps. Welcome to realpolitik :)

Oh and as far as restricting access via Iranian waters, Iran is mostly adhering to IL because it hasn’t ratified UNCLOS.

> For the record, Oman signed the No Fees/No Tolls pledge with the rest of the EU literally two days ago.

Thanks for the link, but is this pledge binding in any way, or is it just a symbolic gesture? Because my impression so far has been that Oman is willing to play ball.


You are missing the point actually. We are talking about a world where might is right. That's the world US is making with our flagrant violation of international law.

WHY should the laws be applied selectively? If Iran has ballistic missile capability to enforce its toll in Omani waters then they can and should do so. Might makes right, right? If America/Israel can just decide to bomb a foreign nation, kill its leader, the leaders family, bomb school children, in comparison Iran controlling the strait and asking for tolls seems benign.

Or are you a racist who doesn't see Iranians as human beings?


We can leave at any time. The reason we can't at this point is more like what the Chinese concept, "we lose face". So we will drag this another 20 years into future, another 10T gone and China colonized Mars with Asimov-like robots near AGI and we have failing bridges and the bragging rights that our B21/B22/B3000XT devastating those Iranians 2,967 times! My guns bigger than yours, Chinamen!

I recently read a book from 2015 on the stuxnet hack and a big part of the story is how every president knew how bad a military strike would go. Surreal to read now and the book gave me so much clarity on the current war.

Highly recommend if you like tech AND want some WW II forward context on Iran.

Edit: Countdown to Zero Day is the name of the book.


You forgot to mention the name of the book

Countdown to Zero Day probably! Super good book, technical without being unfriendly to casuals or inaccurate for pros.

Yes, this is it.

Just to be able to gauge what you say, which one are you, casual or pro?

There's no obvious reason to expect that continuing on will result in some sort of resolution in the US's favor.

I'm sure if we made a deal where we leave the Middle East entirely, and in exchange they don't charge any fees, the deal would hold

how convenient to some for us to be placed into such an inextricable position.

I seriously doubt anything but political calculus about midterms and the sinking polling numbers for Republicans along with kickbacks from private military contracts towards certain connected members of the inner-circle went into the decision matrix for starting this war. It was never about whether or not it made sense - Fukuyama's The End of History has long been totally irrelevant, a little cherry on top of the neoliberal promise of global peace.

That book specifically named Donald Trump as the type of figure who could channel thumotic desire into upsetting the neoliberal order back in the early 90s. The title of that book obviously was to generate attention and sales, not a literal statement.

FAFO in action. They can hope and dream for another outcome, but this is the best they’ll get.

It is more of ego thing now. So "just leaving" isn't an option when ego priotised way higher than people needs. "government of the people, by the people, for the people", we never ask which "people"? They may have the same spelling, but I'm sure absolutely not the same group of people in that sentence.

Oh, no, it is way too late for that. The strait is closed if we stay, it's closed if we leave, it's just closed forever for everyone that doesn't wanna be attacked or pays the toll to Iran.

This war has shown everyone that it is just too easy to keep a major navigation route closed with drones and mines.


Just think of all the trouble that just 2 dudes are causing in the world. If Putin would simply leave Ukraine and if Trump would just quietly withdraw from the aggression towards Iran things would really calm down. We'd probably get back to lower gas prices as well as lower interest rates. (but of course, neither of them have the temperament to be able to admit that they were wrong)

Perhaps they are closet climate activists, because raising the price of gas significantly and persistently is realistically the only way we’re ever going to stop burning it.

That's another funny consequence of this conflict: Trump is proud of himself, because he thinks lower exports hurt China, while US oil companies are making record profits. In reality: China's oil reserves are so huge they can last really long time, while their speed up their transformation to renewable energy.

Where are the guillotines when you need them?

I suspect it may be too late for Trump at least - he has managed to demonstrate to Iran that they have more power than they thought they did, and it may be quite difficult to return to the pre-war state of affairs.

It seems many countries around the straits are now thinking "Hmm, we can charge ships to pass through...".

I don't think that would have happened without Trump.


Yeah, it's definitely not going to be back to where it was before he started his Iran debacle. He broke it. But now gaming it out it seems like him just deciding to withdraw would be the best outcome that we could probably get. Otherwise just sticking around in the area and issuing threats just causes Iran to react and that effectively keeps the SoH closed (heck, the US even closes it sometimes).

Geography wins over technology.

There's a third dude missing in that list to complete the new axis of evil: Netanyahu, without which Trump, as stupid as he may be, would probably never have attacked Iran.

A lot of it isn't about these people in particular. It's about what's happening in their countries. Like it or not Trump is more of a symptom of what's going on in the US than the cause. I know that sounds weird but the inflation that's been eating away at a middle class lifestyle for decades is most of what's getting people so riled up, and the unwillingness to reckon with that by "normal" politicians is what got Trump elected.

Putin will end the war in Ukraine if Europe's mediocre political class and NATO stop expanding eastward. That Putin gives back what he conquered through war, keep dreaming.

If iran is fighting with the US, why are they attacking a ship registered in Singapore which was going between Pakistan and the UAE?

Fighting with a friend of the US is fighting the US. Aside from the disruption, it'll lead to complaints, and Iran can always say "blame your watchdog for biting first".

Cause oil not flowing is in their strategic interest.

I can't decipher what you refer to with 'your'.

> Crying about the effects of your own actions

Interesting, you think it was the US Navy who shot at the container ship?


Collateral damage during an unnecessary war.

Not sure about this ship, but US Navy shot plenty of civilian ships, those associated with Iran. At this point US isn't even trying to pretend their actions are lawful, by going to UN and trying to pass some resolution against Iran, they are just "we do not like Iran, so we'll strike their ships". But when Iran does the same MAGAs suddenly remember that international law exists.

But speaking about this ship the GP post implied that US it's American's fault. I mean, it may be, we don't know who shot it.

> But when Iran does the same MAGAs suddenly remember that international law exists.

I looked again and the article doesn't quote any MAGAs. I doubt US will go and complain to UN about it? It will probably just shrug, let Singapore defends its ships and sailors.


I don't mind tobasco, but I'd rather see a Frank's Red Hot

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

Search: