Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | davydm's commentslogin

it's now or never - become McDonaldsLand or stay America.

PS: please get rid of your president - the whole world, which didn't think much of you before, thinks even less of you now, because you elected a trouble-maker racist moron who is so thirsty for attention he'll literally fuck the entire world to get it.


pity it's like "who's line is it anyway?" - the points are meaningless and really don't matter

First, we money is a delusion we all agree to share - it has no intrinsic value whatsoever

Second, stock is an even more-removed delusion based on what people _think_ a company might be worth to buy - a value that changes at the drop of a hat (look at the recent massive dips, eg nvidia)

Third, and this is probably the real bummer - all this delusion is just going to make Smelly Tusk even more insufferable. Yay.


We agreed to its value, and it can be spent and in your limited life span it translates to a drastically different life experience. So, fake money is still money. Not making any judgements on the topic, but waving this truth away doesn’t work.

He can't spend this trillion. It's not real.

It's the notional value of multiplying the last sale price times the number of shares he has. He can't spend the money until he sells the shares, and there's no reason to think that they would actually all sell for the last selling price.

In fact, Musk is restricted from selling shares at the moment. His bank balance is the same today as it was yesterday.

(Caveat: he can borrow money today, using the shares as collateral. When the debt comes due, he can sell shares to sell it. So if he wanted additional spending money today, he could have it. Probably not up to the full trillion dollars, but some absurdly large sum.)

(Caveat bonus: he can actually roll over that borrowing indefinitely -- borrow more money to pay back the last one. Meaning that he's just acquired all of that money without having to pay a single dollar in taxes. It's good to be rich.)


You've made my point for me. He will never need to spend the trillion personally, it's humanly not possible, but it was already not possible to spend his previous wealth, and if he had started selling that it would crater, but now, he can sell much more of it before he sees the effect, and this goes on. This is what infinite wealth means, you can continually spend more that you could yesterday. Money is money is money.

Because there are always people trying to take advantage of others and I guess most people would prefer less of that in society.

Personally, I think it's been a boon.

Yes, people are more lonely, but I'd counter with my experience over the last 5 years or so: people at work are simply NOT your friend. End of story. They never were, they never will be. You MIGHT find A friend at work. You might even be lucky enough to move into a company where you already have a friend or two. But the realisation has hit hard over the last few years that 99% of interactions within a work sphere are not genuine human connection. Most are simply data flow to support the business. Some parts are masking fluff that people put up to appear friendly. But with less time spent dazzled by people's social skills, their true intentions come through plainly in their work outputs and reciprocity - most especially the latter is telling: I've stopped being such an eager volunteer to help people (at least, most people) simply because I know I can't expect the same back - and my salary is paid based on _my_ outputs, not those of co-workers, so if they're not going to co-operate, there's little incentive for me to do so.

Company leaders also seem to be even more out of touch with their people as they are no longer forced to fraternise, but can instead remain atop their hills, barking orders and peering out their their foggy scopes at the terrain below. What a wonderful time to be alive - when the socially malleable have their substrate taken away to expose exactly how shallow they are.


1. The perception that linux doesn't matter because it's not a big enough market (that's changing, largely due to valve) 2. The simple truth that it's way easier to wrest control of the machine on windows - for tasks like enforcing DRM and licensing - if y'all look underneath your seats, y'all get a free kernel-level anticheat! 3. WSL doesn't do display well - cli is fine, GUI apps still require some interaction/tricks like remote X or similar (afaik - this could be old knowledge, since I haven't been in windoze land for a long time - at least a year) 4. To be a viable choice for GUI toolkit (really, the thing that's hugely different), one either has to use something that abstracts the underlying api (and often ends up losing something, somewhere, out of a necessity for a standard api) or manually write code for two toolkits (eg native win32 and cocoa is probably already too much for a lot of places, and if they were going to go cross-platform, the easy money is in OSX, not linux - everything there is paid - I wasted around $300 just trying to make a mbp not suck before finally giving up). So either you adopt and learn a toolkit you can use everywhere (eg Qt) and accept the limitations, or you write your own, but that ties you to an OS unless you really had an aim to bother with other platforms, and... see (1)

Mainly: true sandbox separation. I don't want the model having full access to my machine. With a dump format that Claude understands, I'm able to pass only the files I want Claude to see, and he can't break any of them. I don't care about setting up access lists and so on. I don't trust that the cli product will be properly sanboxed and it's quite clear their software offerings are largely aigen code, and I catch bugs from Claude every day. I also get useful stuff, so it's worth it, but definitely not worth it, imo, to grant it any access to my machine.

There are a number of utilities for this. I use jai: https://jai.scs.stanford.edu/ but also have seen nono: https://github.com/always-further/nono smolvm: https://github.com/smol-machines/smolvm zerobox https://github.com/afshinm/zerobox and matchlock https://github.com/jingkaihe/matchlock

They all have pros and cons. Pick the one that suits you best. Then you're also agent harness flexible (I use opencode).


As a jai and linux user, myself, looking at nono's os-sandbox (from here [1]) it seems nice too. Thanks for the recommend I was looking for something that might be nice on Mac and nono seems good to recommend to coworkers and the like.

[1]: https://nono.sh/os-sandbox


I would like a solution that was itself not largely written by an AI

Jai is not written by ai, but only its website is. It's written by a Stanford Computer-Science professor with decades of C++ and Unix/linux experience.

> [1]: Was jai written by an AI coding agent? No. While this web site was obviously made by an LLM (ChatGPT read the man page, asked some follow-up questions, and produced a prompt from which claude code built a vitepress site), jai itself was hand implemented by a Stanford computer science professor with decades of C++ and Unix/linux experience. As an experiment, the author did previously try vibe-coding a container, but the results were disastrous and repeatedly put his machine in a state that required a reboot (e.g., recursively changing the attributes of all mounts in the wrong mount namespace). The author does use coding agents to look for bugs, get feedback, and develop tests. However, rest assured that a single human understands every line of C++ in jai.

[1] https://jai.scs.stanford.edu/faq.html


The cli works on regular sandboxes just fine (podman, docker, bwrap, etc).

Sandboxing a GUI is typically more operational overhead than sandboxing a cli (mounting compositor sockets, GPU access, etc).


I've been using jai [1] for sandboxing on linux (although I use opencode and local models and not claude code) and I'm pretty satisfied with it. It comes in three different modes [2]: casual mode, strict mode, and bare mode. Here's some descriptions of each mode:

Casual mode [3]: > Your home directory is mounted as a copy-on-write overlay. The jailed process sees your real files, but writes go to $HOME/.jai/default.changes instead of modifying originals, except in the directory where you ran jai. Your current working directory grants full read/write access to code in the jail (unless suppressed with -D). So files deleted there are really gone. /tmp and /var/tmp are private. The rest of the filesystem is read-only.

Strict mode [4]: > The process runs as the unprivileged jai system user, not as you. Home directory is an empty private directory at $HOME/.jai/<name>.home. Granted directories (via -d or cwd) are exposed with id-mapped mounts — files look like they are owned by jai inside the jail. Because the process has a different UID, it cannot read files outside your home directory that are only accessible to your user — this is where confidentiality comes from.

Bare mode [5]: > Home directory is an empty private directory, like strict mode. But the process runs as your user, not as jai. This means it cannot provide confidentiality — the process can still read any file accessible to your UID outside the home directory.

I've always ran my stuff in casual so far just so my whole computer doesn't get rimraffed :P. but I'm thinking of switching to just strict mode, but haven't really vibe coded in a while so I haven't tried it yet.

[1]: https://jai.scs.stanford.edu/

[2]: https://jai.scs.stanford.edu/modes.html

[3]: https://jai.scs.stanford.edu/modes.html#casual-mode

[4]: https://jai.scs.stanford.edu/modes.html#strict-mode

[5]: https://jai.scs.stanford.edu/modes.html#bare-mode


If you don’t trust the CLI version to be properly sandbox d, why would the desktop one be?

I made myself a very simple one from the start when I realized it can access everything on my computer https://git.jeena.net/jeena/agent-container my goal was that it would work transparently and the paths and user, etc. would be just the same as on the host but inside of a docker container.

does claude desktop actually solve this issue? I’m on mac and use docker sbx to solve this https://docs.docker.com/ai/sandboxes/get-started/

On Linux you have bubblewrap!

Spoken like a true bot sir!


I've yet to see any masterpieces. I've had a lot of good enough code come out, and some that was blatantly wrong. You still need to be an expert in the domain if you want to use ai codegen effectively. I've been using Claude for a few months now.

cool idea - i can't tell from the page if there's any choice of model (though the name and voices suggest gpt only); neat idea though. Perhaps this is the solution: devs should have a device like this, and pedal to power it. Solves the power problem, also solves the typical "devs need exercise" problem.

Ah, I see his philosophy of "steal from the poor to give to the rich" still strongly in play. What a useless muppet.

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

Search: