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

> Atmospheric entry (if that's what you mean) is irrelevant.

I think the OP meant that Earths magnetic field and atmosphere shields any terrestrial matter far more than than a bare asteroid that has no such protections, so it seems implausible at first glance that these things would develop or survive in open space rather than here.


> And we're sort of back to square 1.

Specifications are smaller than the full code, just as high level code is smaller than the functionally equivalent assembly. As we ascend the abstraction ladder the amount of reading a human needs to do decreases. I don't think this should really count as "back to square 1".


That has always been the perceived promise of higher-abstraction software specs: automated code generation from something higher-level, thus making programmers increasingly obsolete.

  binary => hexadecimal instructions
  hexadecimal => assembly language
  assembly => portable, "high-level" languages (C, FORTRAN, COBOL, etc.)
  HLLs => 3GLs (BASIC, C++, Pascal, Java, C#, JavaScript, etc.)
  3GLs => 4GLs/DSLs/RADs and "low-code/no-code"[0]
Among the RADs is Microsoft Visual Basic, which along with WinForms and SQL was supposed to make business programmers nearly obsolete, but instead became a new onramp into programming.

In particular, I'd like to highlight UML, which was supposed to mostly obsolete programming through auto-generated code from object-oriented class diagrams.[1] The promise was that "business domain experts" could model their domain via visual UML tooling, and the codegen would handle it from there. In practice, UML-built applications became maintenance nightmares.

In every one of these examples, the artifact that people made "instead of programming" became the de-facto programming language, needing to be maintained over time, abstracted, updated, consumed behind APIs, etc. -- and programmers had to be called in to manage the mess.

It's interesting that Spec4 can be auto-generated, then used to generate code. My question is - what do you do when you have (a) consumers depending on a stable API, and (b) requests for new features? Maybe hand the job to Claude Code or a human developer with a suite of unit tests to guarantee API compatibility, but at that point we're back to an agent (LLM or human) doing the work of programming, with the Spec4 code as the programming language being updated and maintained.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth-generation_programming_...

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26934795


You can easily run a quant of this on a DGX Spark though. Seems like a small investment if it meaningful improves Lean productivity.

Is it though?

Most people I know that use agents for building software and tried to switch to local development, every single time they switch back to Claude/codex.

It's just not worth it. The models are that much better and continue to get released / improve.

And it's much cheaper unless you're doing like 24/7 stuff.

Even on the $200/m plan, that's cheaper than buying a $3k dgx or $5k m4 max with enough ram.

Not to mention you can no longer use your laptop as a laptop as the power draw drains it - you'd need to host separately and connect


A single DGX Spark can service a whole department of mathematicians (or programmers), and you can cluster up to 4 of them them to fit very large models like GLM-5 and quants of Kimi K2.5. This is nearing frontier-level model size.

I understand the value proposition of the frontier cloud models, but we're not as far off from self-hosting as you think, and it's becoming more viable for domain-specific models.


That's great news- I wonder if that will help drive cloud costs down too

Does a warrant ever expire? How long can they monitor you once the warrant is issued? Do they ever have to notify you or anyone else that you were being monitored and they found no criminal conduct? Don't you see the potential for abuse here?

All of these questions, and more, are answered by examining what happens with phone taps. Phone taps, which historically were treated precisely the same, and further, there was only ever one phone company in a region back then.

All legislative change is interpreted by courts. So to answer your questions:

# look to see how the legislation is written for phone taps

# know that this new legislation is changing things, the code is being modified

# now look at judicial decisions, and you will have your answer

Seeing as you have no idea how other warrants work, when they expire, you're really just looking for the worst case scenario, without even attempting to see what would happen, and has happened for 100+ years.

Yes?



Of course vibe coding is going to be a headache if you have very particular aesthetic constraints around both the code and UX, and you aren't capable of clearly and explicitly explaining those constraints (which is often hard to do for aesthetics).

There are some good points here to improve harnesses around development and deployment though, like a deployment agent should ask if there is an existing S3 bucket instead of assuming it has to set everything up. Deployment these days is unnecessarily complicated in general, IMO.


> They'll be thinking "Of all possible things we could talk about, why this??"

Sure, but the point is that they should just say that, and the person who raised the issue must then explain why it's worth their time. Maybe there's an important point they're trying to make, maybe not.


True, but couldn't you just simulate it by enqueing a thunk/continuation?

I assume purity matters. It probably picks up a lot of contaminants during use, and chip manufacturing is pretty sensitive to contaminants.

you can put He in a closed loop system and still use it for cooling, by using it as the thermodynamic working fluid, and then selecting any other fluid as the heat carrier?

That's not clear actually. It's been awhile since I watched the video on the ASML EUV system for etching wafers, but from my recollection, the UV light ablates away layers of wafers and so particles of silicon presumably contaminate the noble gas that's flowing over it. I don't think a closed loop is possible in the existing setups.

thats what I am questioning, wouldn't another gas be feasible?

I do know that some parts and components actually do have helium enclosed in the part package (can or so, not the shipping packaging!)

I'm getting mixed signals: its for the phase transition temperature, its for cleaning, ...

is EUV actually ablating layers of wafer? I thought the EUV was for patterning photoresist, you make it sound like ASML eliminated photoresist?


Here is the Veritasium video where they review ASML's EUV lithography in depth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiUHjLxm3V0

High thermal conductivity, inertness, and low absorption of the EUV wavelength used are the primary characteristics needed, and purity is needed to eliminate contamination of numerous ultrasensitive stages. AI summarized it as follows:

EUV tools require ultra‑high‑purity helium, typically grade 9N (99.9999999%) or better, with strict ppb‑level limits on: Nitrogen, Oxygen, Moisture, Hydrocarbons, Refractory compounds, Particulates.

How helium is used: - Cooling the EUV plasma source - Purging and protecting optics - Maintaining inert, ultra‑clean environments - Leak detection


It's a little weird that you seem to think that humans can't make technological progress without globalization.

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

Search: