As this site is ready testament towards, there are a lot of "open source" types who have their ass firmly planted on their face about AI. "It's a fad", "it's a gimmicky chatbot", "It's not real intelligence".

Yeah, OK. But it is a real tool, and one which is increasingly showing its value for... literally everything. Get onboard or get left behind.

You can pretty easily fix the "annoying the shit out of maintainers" problem by having modern code commit/merge management practices.

You know, something I'd think "open source maintainers" would be pretty readily willing to do. Not only is it best practice (and has been a long time) to gate PR merge on CI completion, but it's trivially easy to have regression and e2e testing in place, as well as require specific artifacts in the commit as evidence that it "works on my machine".

I've got to wonder about the people who are (still, even/particularly on this site) saying AI is not capable or useful when it's able to do things like this.

Those of you who still think AI is a glorified chatbot: what's your rationale?

I don't really care enough about RSA to read deeply into the paper, but it seems to exploit a service that will sign billions of your messages with the secret key that you are trying to crack... which I seem to recall was known to be a potential problem for RSA thirty years ago (so don't do that).

A cheap Windows PC is now around $1,000. If you don't need Windows you can use one of these instead and even at current inflated prices it costs a lot less than that Windows PC.

I also have one running as a frontend to some local AI servers, with Open WebUI, Opencode and other things that don't require much CPU power. I'd rather them running on a box that I can wipe and reinstall if the AI software decides it wants to take over the machine and do dastardly things to it than direct on the users' computer or the AI servers.

"with a much more limited use-case than they claimed"

You can't be seriously making that claim, in September 2026. When was the last time you actually tried using these models?

It's arguable that they can't yet, by default, code to the standard or expectation of a highly skilled and capable developer, or do much of anything to the quality of someone at the top of their field.

But they can do 50-80% of it vanilla, and probably hit 95% with the correct instruction/harness in many cases - and they can do it hundreds of times faster than a person could.

I'm curious which use case you think they're limited in.

So much for RSI - they've got an army of Indian contractors doing it. (No wonder the quality of these models is highly... questionable, at times.)

"Eat your own slop!"

Of course they know that if people keep feeding slop into the AI training it will just get sloppier and sloppier. But what other data do they have to feed into bigger models now they've already hoovered up pretty much the entire Internet?

"protect against renegade AI"

This is a fundamentally unsolvable problem. It's like: "How do we stop humans from being humans?"

Saying that's your objective is fundamentally dishonest. You can't protect against the unknown. You can't protect against anything without covering all the corner cases, and AI, by it's very nature, is almost exclusively corner cases.

You've apparently not worked in "developer heavy" companies before.

Nobody gives a shit about operations, generally.

It's Covid/Two Weeks to Flatten The Curve/The Terrorists/SARS/9-11/The Russians!/The Nazis - all over again.

Just reactionary FUD to try to herd sheep into a specific direction.

This shit can't be trusted.

"I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."

It's interesting that 2001 predicted modern AI so well.

It's all so tiresome.

How's it going to 'replicate it on every vulnerable system it can reach' when big, fat American AI requires several terabytes of RAM, a few million dollars of GPUs and hundreds of kilowatts of power to run?

That ain't gonna run on my dishwasher, no matter how insecure it may be.

The whole thing is simply ludicrous slop to justify regulation to keep competitors out of their market so they won't go bankrupt.

Trump is basically a 1990s Democrat.

Many people are simply too young to remember when Democrats got elected by saying they'd keep jobs in America, keep foreigners out of America, and Bomb for Peace.