josephg

22 ms·

421.
by josephg 6mo ago
> Once you write enough code, you'll realize you need synchronization primitives for async code as well. In pretty much the same cases as threaded code. I've been programming for 30 years, including over a decade in JS. You nee
422.
by josephg 6mo ago
I completely agree. I really like rust, but all the async stuff is so half baked. It’s shocking coming from the JavaScript ecosystem. Async feels - comparatively - incredibly simple in JS. Even async streams are simple in JS and they work g
423.
by josephg 6mo ago
Not true. I’ve used both, and I often prefer the explicitness of async await. It’s easier to reason about. The language guarantees that functions which aren’t async can’t be preempted - and that makes a lot of code much easier to write beca
424.
by josephg 6mo ago
> At any step in that sequence, the language could have introduced green threads and the job would have been done. The job wouldn’t have been done. They would have needed threads. And mutexes. And spin locks. And atomics. And semaphores.
425.
by josephg 6mo ago
Yep. There's lots of things I'd want to test before assuming the ARM architecture is fundamentally better than x86 in some way.
426.
by josephg 6mo ago
The Atari 2600 only had 128 bytes of ram. It’s not that far off…
427.
by josephg 6mo ago
What CPUs are they both running? Is the ARM chip simply faster?
428.
by josephg 6mo ago
What is the RAM and storage on each of these machines? Is it possible the Snapdragon has packaged RAM (with faster interconnects as a result), and the x86 machine is using DIMMs with longer traces? And what about storage? For that matter, w
429.
by josephg 6mo ago
Ok, but this is not a commonly used crate. Its brand new!
430.
by josephg 6mo ago
For this problem, I’d consider a different approach. You have a fuzzer, and based on some seed it’s generating lots of records. You then need to query a specific record (or set of records) based on the leaf. I’d just store a table of record
431.
by josephg 6mo ago
Its not proof, but its certainly a smoking gun. Even when humans use that literary device, we don't typically do it every other paragraph. It feels like a pretty safe bet that an LLM wrote most of this.
432.
by josephg 6mo ago
There's still plenty of human authored content out there. No need to post slop on HN. My rule is: If you can't be bothered writing an article, don't expect me to read it.
433.
by josephg 6mo ago
Its got this ... cadence: > Same earnings call. Same margin targets. Same quarterly pressure. The sense that you were choosing between competitors was a fiction that VF Corp had no incentive to correct. > That threat disciplined every
434.
by josephg 6mo ago
Yeah I have all this data backed up on a couple different drives. IRC and ICQ logs going back to when I was a teenager. Digitised photos from when I was a kid through to the present day. Source code for projects I worked on from when I was
435.
by josephg 7mo ago
It could be massively improved with a special CPU instruction for racing dram reads. That might make it actually useful for real applications. As it is, the threading model she used here would make it incredibly difficult to use this in a r
436.
by josephg 7mo ago
I hope this approach gets some visibility in the CPU field. It could be obviously improved with a special cpu instruction which simply races two reads and returns the first one which succeeds. She’s doing an insane amount of work, making mu
437.
by josephg 7mo ago
Yes; linux is generally supported better than freebsd. CUDA and Docker work out of the box on linux. Linux has better graphics drivers and steam support. Opensource software (libraries, tools) are much more likely to be tested & work pr
438.
by josephg 7mo ago
IMAP works in outlook. Its just horrible to set up and half broken. Click "Add account". Then type in your email address, click "Choose provider", select IMAP, then click "Sync directly with IMAP" (dark pattern
439.
by josephg 7mo ago
There's also two different applications which are both "Outlook for Mac". If you go into the "Outlook" menu in the app, there's a "Legacy Outlook" button, which relaunches outlook using a completely d
440.
by josephg 7mo ago
Alright, except that’s not what I was saying. I was just pointing out that LLMs don’t replace fuzzing or static analysis. They complement those techniques. And yes, LLMs may drive those techniques directly, but they often don’t. At least
441.
by josephg 7mo ago
Thanks - these talks are mindblowing. Highly recommended.
442.
by josephg 7mo ago
Do we know that? I'd love to see some of the ways security researchers are using LLMs. We have no idea if claude was using fuzzing here, or just reading the files and spotting bugs directly in the source code. A few weeks ago someone t
443.
by josephg 7mo ago
I don't have an anti-AI stance. Maybe I should have spelled that out more clearly in my comment above. I'm as excited and terrified by this technology as everyone else. I think we're all in vicious agreement that we need defe
444.
by josephg 7mo ago
Its not a person's work. It reads like an LLM's work. If you can't be bothered to write an article yourself, its incredibly arrogant to ask me to read it. Speaking of the HN guidelines, they also say this: > Don't pos
445.
by josephg 7mo ago
The guidelines you linked says this: > Don't post generated comments or AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans. The same principle applies to submissions. If you couldn't be bothered to write it, don't a
446.
by josephg 7mo ago
Yeah I agree. Don't tell me you authored something when claude did the majority of the writing. Use claude if you want, but don't pretend you wrote the content when you didn't. I also hate this style of plastic, pre-digested
447.
by josephg 7mo ago
It still has a very ... plastic feeling. The way it writes feels cheap somehow. I don't know why, but Claude seems much more natural to me. I enjoy reading its writing a lot more. That said, I'll often throw a prompt into both cla
448.
by josephg 7mo ago
> Combined results (Claude Mythos / Claude Opus 4.6 / GPT-5.4 / Gemini 3.1 Pro) > Terminal-Bench 2.0: 82.0% / 65.4% / 75.1% / 68.5% > USAMO: 97.6% / 42.3% / 95.2% / 74.4% > The bigges
449.
by josephg 7mo ago
To be clear, we don’t know that this tool is better at finding bugs than fuzzing. We just know that it’s finding bugs that fuzzing missed. It’s possible fuzzing also finds bugs that this AI would miss.
450.
by josephg 7mo ago
Super interesting. I wish this article wasn’t written by an LLM though. It feels soulless and plastic.

More ›