> You complete one charge cycle when you’ve used (discharged) an amount that represents 100% of your battery’s capacity* — but not necessarily all from one charge. For instance, you might use 75% of your battery’s capacity one day, then recharge it fully overnight. If you use 25% the next day, you will have discharged a total of 100%, and the two days will add up to one charge cycle. It could take several days to complete a cycle.
Feels like this guide falls on itself right at the start.
It claims to teach to you “think in Vim” and understand its philosophy, yet the very first instructions it gives you are how to change pretty important keys (Esc and leader) and lists caveats for doing so. That’s not helpful and is introduced too soon. If you know nothing about a tool and the first thing you learn is to change the basics and that those have consequences—which you don’t yet understand—you’re starting by confusing the reader.
Those tips should be at the end, when there’s enough context to make an informed decision.
> The whole artificial scarcity Anthropic created around Mythos / Glasswing is quite brilliant to be honest
Isn’t that just the same strategy OpenAI has used over and over? Sam Altman is always “OMG, the new version of ChatGPT is so scary and dangerous”, but then releases it anyway (tells you a lot about his values—or lack thereof) and it’s more of the same. Pretty sure Aesop had a fable about that. “The CEO who cried ‘what we’ve made is too dangerous’”, or something.
Right, but in Aesop’s fable, the wolf did eventually come. It’s asymmetric, because in this case the wolf is not coming for the boy, it’s coming for everybody else
The boy isn't crying wolf strictly to save himself. He does it to get the attention of the town, knowing they'll come to the aid of the livestock he's been tasked with watching. Yes, their aid is primarily to save the boy, but the danger is still to the larger community rather than isolated to the lookout.
They way they've published hashes of the bugs it has found so that once those bugs are fixed they can responsibly disclose them while also proving that they weren't lying... that displays a willingness to dabble in evidence which is far beyond anything OpenAI has done to support their claims.
This. I see much cheap naysaying without referenece to the vuln hashes. If it is smoke and mirrors, then the naysayers should loudly shout down the specific hashes and when they get revealed, or don't, then they will have done a great service to dissuading fake claims to world changing tech.
>Sam Altman is always “OMG, the new version of ChatGPT is so scary and dangerous”, but then releases it anyway
One of the many reasons nobody should give Scam Altman their money. It's continually infuriating that this serial grifter is in such a position of power.
Anthropic has not in fact released it, and it does in fact appear to be that dangerous, judging by the flood of vulnerability reports seen by e.g. Daniel Stenberg.
Certainly it’s a strategy OpenAI has used before, and when they did so it was a lie. Altman’s dishonesty does not mean it can never be true, however.
The flood of reports that open source projects like curl, Linux and Chromium are getting are presumably due to public models like Open 4.6 that released earlier this year, and not models with limited availability.
A few months of restricting access to people they think will actually fix problems is a big deal. Obviously only an idiot would think it could or should be kept under wraps forever.
> judging by the flood of vulnerability reports seen by e.g. Daniel Stenberg
Maybe I've missed anything, but what Stenberg been complaining about so far been the wave of sloppy reports, seemingly reported by/mainly by AIs. Has that ratio somehow changed recently to mainly be good reports with real vulnerabilities?
> Improvement in AI models' capabilities became noticeable early 2026, said Daniel Stenberg.
> He estimates that about 1 in 10 of the reports are security vulnerabilities, the rest are mostly real bugs. Just three months into 2026, the cURL team Stenberg leads has found and fixed more vulnerabilities than each of the previous two years.
> The challenge with AI in open source security has transitioned from an AI slop tsunami into more of a ... plain security report tsunami. Less slop but lots of reports. Many of them really good.
> I'm spending hours per day on this now. It's intense.
Partly true. I think the consensus was it wasn't comparable because Mythos swept the entire codebase and found the vulnerabilities, whereas the open models were told where to look for said vulnerabilities.
Not really. The models were pointed specifically at the location of the vulnerability and given some extra guidance. That's an easier problem than simply being pointed at the entire code base.
Surely the Anthropic model also only looked at one chunk of code at a time. Cannot fit the entire code base into context. So supplying an identical chunk size (per file, function, whatever) and seeing if the open source model can find anything seems fair. Deliberately prompting with the problem is not.
Maybe that’s part of it, but I’ve also noticed autocorrect on my devices often correcting incorrectly. As in, I type the word correctly and it decides “oh, surely you meant this other similarly spelled word” and changes it. Sometimes I don’t notice until after sending the message.
I use MS SwiftKey on my android phone and it will often autocorrect my correctly spelled, correctly used, words, to words that probably don't exist in any language (recently it corrected "blow" to "blpw").
I have French installed on my keyboard as well so sometimes it will randomly correct English words to French words (inconsistently, but at least they're words), but blpw is not a word in either of those languages.
Unfortunately, I think me typing blpw three times has officially added it to my dictionary :)
At this stage, I can no longer take comparing LLMs to calculators as a good faith argument. That’s a talking point, a framing device, one whose flaws have been explained ad nauseam (as exemplified by the sibling replies), and I’m left questioning either the reasoning abilities or the honesty of those still making it.
They. Are not. The same.
Have you ever known people to commit suicide, kill, or give themselves rare diseases because of their calculators? How about people dating their calculator and going batshit for a software update?
Not to mention learning to do on your own is a useful skill to teach you to think, and an essential skill to (as you suggest) verify answers. People not understanding how things work is exactly why they take bullshit output from an LLM as gospel.
I also note that such arguments tend to be profoundly selfish and self-centred. Your anecdote happened to have an outcome you enjoyed and benefitted from, but I bet that wasn’t the reality for all your colleagues. Just like you are glad for the calculators in your class, some other student may be glad for the lack of them in theirs and it may be the reason they got into their field of study.
There are simpler LLMs that run on much cheaper devices and are still helpful for baseline tasks. Of course they are prone to hallucinating once they reach the limits of their world knowledge, but this also changes their effectiveness in an educational context: they can help you polish a paper (much of their reliable knowledge is about language, syntax and style/pragmatics of the input texts), but you still have to plan the writing on your own.
Maybe teaching students to take their whatever devices to run AI is the way, sure. All I tried to say is if we're teaching students to think independently, we should teach them independent tools.
That however requires significant investments - either each computer gets a powerful GPU for local inference (which cost a fortune) or the school gets a rack worth of compute. Most schools however even struggle to get their children fed.
Another issue is that it forces kids to stay in school for longer to do their homework, which can be a serious problem in rural areas where public transport is limited, so parents are forced to fetch their kids from school which may not be compatible with working hours.
The fact so many people think businesses need to do do do, faster faster faster, now now now, at all costs is a major reason everything sucks, everything is fucked up, everyone is exploited.
To be more precise, the people want to live within a certain standard. I can’t think of anyone¹ who really wants a job. Purpose, something to do, money (which translates to standard of living), recognition, sure, but those don’t really necessitate a job, as in something you have to do on the regular to be able to survive through the indirection of money.
The distinction is important because those who have the power you described are also the ones who have the biggest incentive to perpetuate this notion that everyone needs a job and that there’s no other way the system could work. Thus, by framing it in the context of jobs we’re discussing on their terms and have already lost.
¹ For sure there’ll be someone, but not enough to be meaningful.
That’s a very USA-centric view. 200$ for a textbook which will (often) only be used for a couple of chapters and was written by the professor shouldn’t be normal anywhere. The price of that book could pay for months (and in some cases years) of tuition in EU countries.
As someone from the EU who was always curious about the Playdate, I never got one because the price becomes even more absurd once you factor shipping and taxes. It easily goes to double or more. I wish Panic all the luck with the console, but I think we can agree that paying Switch 2 / PlayStation 5 prices for one is hard to justify.
There’s no discussion of price point in the article. There is in this thread, so one can only deduce that when the OP said “Re: price point” they are answering the thread, not the article.
And not everyone on HN is in Duke, or North Carolina, or the USA.
> more than 50 Playdates have been provided to students
Provided. To me that doesn’t seem like the students are paying for them. From other comments in the thread of former Duke students using iPods, it seems Duke lends you the hardware.
Furthermore, “tuition is expensive so buying expensive hardware is the least of your problems” is not a good argument. There’s a reason people in the USA drown in student debt. Whatever you can save is good.
They aren't drowning in debt because of supplies, they're drowning in debt because both the federal + state governments have stopped investing in education since the GFC in 2008. That plus a bloated admin body that cares about itself more than its literal mission (providing education + research).
> The price of that book could pay for months (and in some cases years) of tuition in EU countries.
To your later comment, the devices are provided. You dont need to buy them.
Also that's not actual price. the tuition fees are that, doesn't mean that's the price. It's just heavily subsizied by the government. Hard to find sources, but the actual price/student in Germany seems to be ~10k Euro/student/year.
> the devices are provided. You dont need to buy them.
I was talking about a textbook, not the devices. I think that was made pretty clear by my use of the word “textbook”.
> the tuition fees are that, doesn't mean that's the price.
Seeing as I’m talking about what people have to pay, that’s irrelevant. What even is your comment? You’re taking what I said and responding to entirely different things. That’s not how we have a productive, good faith conversation.
> Hard to find sources, but the actual price/student in Germany seems to be ~10k Euro/student/year.
There are more countries in the EU besides Germany. In some, you don’t pay at all.
Furthermore, each college has different costs, there’s not just a fixed cost for student for everything. The costs per student for philosophy are not the comparable to the costs per student for veterinary medicine.
Like I said, I’m factoring in the price when you include shipping and taxes to Europe. If I wanted to buy a Playdate, it’d cost me close to the price of those consoles here.
There’s nothing odd about two belts in this situation. One is the belt for the pants and the other is the utility belt holding the pouches. You need to be able to add and remove the utilities without having your pants fall.
The weird choice is having a belt and suspenders. That only works as a fashion choice, which makes little sense for an explorer.
The definition is pretty well established, and Apple themselves have for years used it consistently.
https://www.apple.com/batteries/why-lithium-ion/
> You complete one charge cycle when you’ve used (discharged) an amount that represents 100% of your battery’s capacity* — but not necessarily all from one charge. For instance, you might use 75% of your battery’s capacity one day, then recharge it fully overnight. If you use 25% the next day, you will have discharged a total of 100%, and the two days will add up to one charge cycle. It could take several days to complete a cycle.
reply