Anecdotally: The most depressed friends I have are all tech workers who are using AI daily for their personal life, and of course at their respective work places.
I know that’s not a fair correlation to make, but I have friends who use AI casually and not in tech, they seem outwardly fine and don’t make depressive comments about the future.
I feel like this is so much of an overreaction to a non-issue.
The flow is pretty straightforward if you ask me. It’s a few clicks and one page digests of your options.
It’s a decision tree to let most people in the world who have either an Android or iOS device easily submit their form quickly, or just proceed with the guidance to just apply online (your preference obviously).
There should always be web fallbacks for those opposed to smartphones or unable to use them. Insisting the elderly use them for any type of bureaucratic flow results too often in stress and confusion.
>The flow is pretty straightforward if you ask me. I
I think that about a lot of the cancellation flows posted on here that people consider "dark patterns". Skip an upsell or two, decline a pause offer, bam, cancellation page.
This is an insane take. Apple and Google both reserve the right to deny accounts to people without any legal appeal at worst. At best, a legal dispute would have to be resolved in US courts. How other countries (including my own) accept that as a condition to use public services is beyond belief, and pointing this out is not an overreaction.
Why are we willingly placing private companies – private companies subject to foreign jurisdictions, even! – in the role of gatekeepers of public services? We have surely completely lost our minds!
You can literally just use the online form. Have you actually tried using your search engine to query applying, and seeing just how easy it is to optionally apply online?
Over half of the world’s population is using an Android or iOS device. Most people visiting a country in the UK or have the means to afford a trip, most likely have a functioning mobile phone.
I find it somewhat amusing you think I’m “insane” for suggesting most of the modern world has a relatively accessible Android or iOS device to apply for a visa.
> You can literally just use the online form. Have you actually tried using your search engine to query applying, and seeing just how easy it is to optionally apply online?
This whole story is about how they're trying to pressure you into using the app.
> Over half of the world’s population is using an Android or iOS device. Most people visiting a country like the UK or have the means to afford a trip, most likely have a functioning mobile phone.
That does not in any way affect any of what I wrote. I'll try to write it differently: Do you think it's OK that Google and Apple decide (at worst on their very own without oversight, at best with the oversight of a foreign country that isn't the one you're travelling to or from) who gets to do these things and under what conditions?
> I find it someone amusing you think I’m “insane” for suggesting most of the modern world has a relatively accessible android or iOS device to apply for a visa.
I find it insane that you think that because Google and Apple happen to grace most people with access to Android and iOS, then it's fine that we all live by their mercy.
I’m sorry but I can’t respond further, conversation is going nowhere. You clearly have it out for Apple and Google, and you are not being “pressured” into doing anything.
Critical reading and thinking would lead you through the flow to click on the “continue application online” form.
I thought so too, but if you follow the 'start now' link you get a page full of trying to push you to use the app, then if you say you cannot all the way at the bottom, then you get another page trying to help you with installing the app, then you actually get the form. I'm quite disappointed, usually the UK government digital services are not quite so user-hostile.
There is also a new UK government requirement to verify your identity if you are a director or significant shareholder in a UK company.
The online route for that goes through a couple of pages then says "now switch to the app on your smartphone". In theory you can also go to a Post Office to get your documents checked but it didn't work for me.
It's insane that multi trillion government would rely on a foreign private entity for something so simple yet critical. The only sane answer here is corruption.
No, installing apps is just genuinely bad UX, at least for me, because my password manager doesn't work in apps, and I have to manually generate and copy and paste password. If creators of the app are extra stupid, they make it so that you cannot paste into the password input, so I have to enter the generated password character by character.
And why is it broken? Is there a way for a password manager app to somehow inspect other apps and identify forms within them and interact with the forms?
...yes? I can't tell if you're trolling at this point or genuinely unaware.
Both iOS and Android have APIs for this, you (as the app developer) just mark the relevant fields in the app as login/password/etc, and the OS will interact with your chosen password manager to autofill and/or save them.
If you've never seen this work on your device, then you might have something configured incorrectly — many app developers are incompetent and bad at this; but not _all_ of them.
It works for filling an existing password, but not for creating a new one, iOS still prompts me to fill existing even though I'm on the sign up page. On the web 1Password can also automatically generate a Fastmail masked email address, but I doubt there's any hope for that to work in a native app.
How is this already #1 on the front page with 12 upvotes and 9 comments…
The article doesn’t reveal much. It feels like a fluff piece, and I can’t comprehend what the goal of sharing “we use AI agents” means for the dev community, with little to no examples to share. For a “dev” micro blog, this feels very lackluster. Maybe the Minion could have helped with the technical docs?
EDIT: slightly adjusts tinfoil hat minutes later it’s at #6
However, it is also light on material. I would also like to hear more technical details, they're probably intentionally secretive about it.
But I do, however, understand that building an agent that is highly optimized for your own codebase/process is possible. In fact, I am pretty sure many companies do that but it's not yet in the ether.
Otherwise, one of the most interesting bits from the article was
> Over 1,300 Stripe pull requests (up from 1,000 as of Part 1) merged each week are completely minion-produced, human-reviewed, but containing no human-written code.
I feel like code review is already hard and under done the 'velocity' here is only going to make that worse.
I am also curious how this works when the new crop of junior devs do not have the experience enough to review code but are not getting the experience from writing it.
Agents can already do the review by themselves. I'd be surprised they review all of the code by hand. They probably can't mention it due to the regulatory of the field itself. But from what I have seen agentic review tools are already between 80th and 90th percentile. Out of randomly picked 10 engineers, it will provide more useful comments than most engineers.
the problem with LLM code review is that it's good at checking local consistency and minor bugs, but it generally can't tell you if you are solving the wrong problem or if your approach is a bad one for non-technical reasons.
This is an enormous drawback and makes LLM code review more akin to a linter at the moment.
I mean if the model can reason about making the changes on the large-scale repository then this implies it can also reason about the change somebody else did, no? I kinda agree and disagree with you at the same time, which is why I said most of the engineers but I believe we are heading towards the model being able to completely autonomously write and review its own changes.
There's a good chance that in the long run LLMs can become good at this, but this would require them e.g. being plugged into the meetings and so on that led to a particular feature request. To be a good software engineer, you need all the inputs that software engineers get.
If you read thoroughly through Stripe blog, you will see that they feed their model already with this or similar type of information. Being plugged into the meetings might just mean feed the model with the meeting minutes or let the model listen to the meeting and transcribe the meeting. It seems to me that both of them are possible even as of today.
I was an early MCP hater, but one thing I will say about it is that it's useful as a common interface for secure centralization. I can control auth and policy centrally via a MCP gateway in a way that would be much harder if I had to stitch together API proxies, CLIs, etc to provide capabilities.
well, it's very important, now you know the financial code is handled by a bunch of barely supervised AI tools and can make decisions on whether to use product or not based on that
Or the simpler explanation (which is probably closer to the truth): Stripe is a very popular company on HN as many people use them, their founders sometimes comment here and if they share their opinion on something people pay attention and upvote it.
I find the Peter mention funny because some of the other reasons he said it made sense to move to SF were that labor laws in Europe wouldn’t allow him to work 6-7 days a week, and he’d have to focus more on safety/responsibility in mind in Europe.
He’s moving from London after all, arguably the global AI research hub.
(Also likely SA told him the offer was contingent on him relocating)
I have never had problem working (and seeing other people work) 6-7 days a week in reality in Europe (even if it was unofficial).
But capital structures and politicians are still too close to old European companies from the second world war and don't allow venture capital to florish.
It's easier to earn money by winning a fake EU tender and giving back half of the money to a politician than doing something innovative.
YT is desperate for me to engage with rage bait news, and I’m not biting.
It’s so god damn annoying, regardless of how often I choose to ignore channels or don’t suggest feedback.
All they care about is vote time…give me content I want to view!
Also, in the evenings, my timeline gets weirdly paranoid phobia centric, like deep insecurities people live with that are triggering and keep you up late. It’s so obvious YT is doing this to try and bait me into watching these deeply emotional and personal content, and again, ignoring it and providing feedback seems to do nothing to my feed. I hate it.
I kept having issues like this, with a different kinds of videos, until I scrubbed my history of any of the kinds of videos I did not want.
If I click on something I thought I would want to watch and it is the kind of video I do not want recommended to me I immediately delete it from my watch history, block the channel, and some times block that profile from viewing my youtube channel.
~2 years ago I never had to delete anything from my watch history and my feed/recommendations were ok, now I have to if I do not want my feed/recommendations to occasionally be flooded with something I do not want.
I watch things from unknown-to-me creators in a private window, then copy the URL over to logged in window if it's any good. Same idea, might be an easier workflow.
Absurd that we have these sorts of workarounds, but of course the view numbers are better if it keeps fishing for just the right kind of clickbait trash that you'll wolf it down endlessly.
I only use YouTube with my watch history set to off. So there is no feed, and I only see updates from channels I actually subscribed to. If I want to see some random crap I go search for it but it’s a clean slate next time I open the app. I have found this method of using YouTube to be extremely useful.
I transitioned to using youtube with just that left sidebar for updates from channels i subscribed to, id watch the 2-3 creators videos maybe, slowly that became 1, now its 0. I still consider watching that final creator, but if i do its gonna be because i went to youtube and wanted to type that channel into the search bar, not because of a notification.
Everyone seems to act like youtube is something we need, I just don't really agree. If i want to watch something for entertainment, there are so many amazing shows with deep stories to choose from. If i want to learn, the video medium to me is just straight up garbage. I prefer to read to learn.
Of course there are topics this doesnt totally apply to, but for my purposes, videos are almost always just a way to not only likely repeat the same things you already know for a good chunk of the video, but when you finally find the meat, its still being delivered in a slower way than it could be ingested by reading.
This is the way. I get plenty of feeds, recommendations etc. from others, enough to keep me busy. Follow who I want, and drop in when I see they have something new.
Do not give them the satisfaction. Dont like videos and never comment on anything. The videos are the bait. The comments sections are the trap. Use youtube as a multi-channel TV. Keep it a one-way stream of data. Give them nothing beyond the unavoidable knowledge of what you watch.
I am waiting for the day when they permanently turn off the channels rss feeds. Recently, after years of smooth sailing, they had a couple of outages, first selective, with only about 50% of my feeds effected and yesterday again with 100%, returning 404s. I am concerned given this development and alphabets apparent plan to kill as much interop as possible.
For the uninitiated, afaik, some feedreaders can auto discover the rss url when you add the channels url. Otherwise you have to manually search the channel page source for 'RSS' or 'channel_id='.
And for those that want to get the feed URL, this little Python snippet can get the feed URL from a channel's page, either from the channel's URL itself or a video or playlist page:
I just use two browsers. On one my recommendations are truly well curated but I can’t watch a single out of place video or my feed is corrupted. The other browser is for brain rot time and it’s the Wild West.
I used to have an account for my kids. I thought I would be smart by seeding the history with educational content. I clicked on a lot of videos, let them play etc. I was there when my kids would watch videos - and slowly but surely YouTube started recommending junk AI generated videos.
It is my opinion their algorithms are tuned to push this kind of engagement no matter what.
To me history is useful to continue watching or find videos I’ve already seen. Turning it off will remove a feature I actually need. They force us to see their horrible “for you” content in exchange - so shameful.
I agree the quality of Claude Code recent has felt poor and frustrating.
I’ve been persistently dealing with the agent running in circles on itself when trying to fix bugs, not following directions fully and choosing to only accomplish partial requests, failing to compact and halting a session, and ignoring its MCP tooling and doing stupid things like writing cruddy python and osascripts unnecessarily.
I’ve been really curious about codex recently, but I’m so deep into Claude Code with multiple skills, agents, MCPs, and a skill router though.
Can anyone recommend an easy migration path to codex as a first time codex user from Claude code?
> Japan’s requirement for an audible camera shutter sound isn’t just a quirky design decision — it’s a deliberate policy meant to prevent secret photography.
That law regulates captured images. It doesn't require continuous shutter sounds while the phone is processing and even displaying the camera input - only once an image is captured. It seems unlikely that the AirPods will allow users to capture IR images that are used for gestural control and environmental awareness for system functions.
>I suspect it could be due to Japan requiring that cameras play a sound when taking a photo or video.
That depends on what "taking a photo or video" means. If it only covers making a recording, then it won't apply to airpods. The same applies for faceID for instance, I doubt japanese iPhones are making shutter sounds everytime you pull out your phone, even though it's obviously using the camera.
I know that’s not a fair correlation to make, but I have friends who use AI casually and not in tech, they seem outwardly fine and don’t make depressive comments about the future.