Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | vmg12's commentslogin

OpenCode launched a couple of months ago so that makes sense that it's worse. It's much better than Claude Code now. Somehow for the same model, opencode completes the same work faster than claude code and the ux is much better.

You win by adoption.

Here adoption is a combination on the tool and the model.

If people can’t pay the model to use the tool, they might not use the tool even if it’s better.

That’s what anthropic is doing.

It might be faster, but it’s more expensive.


There is no loyalty. They eho have the best models win.

The only way remains to try and lock consumers into your ecosystem.


Meant to say "it was worse" not "it's worse"

It's pretty simple, don't give llms access to anything that you can't afford to expose. You treat the llm as if it was the user.

> You treat the llm as if it was the user.

That's not sufficient. If a user copies customer data into a public google sheet, I can reprimand and otherwise restrict the user. An LLM cannot be held accountable, and cannot learn from mistakes.


I get that but just not entirely obvious how you do that for the Notion AI.

Don't use AI/LLMs that have unfettered access to everything?

Feels like the question is "How do I prevent unauthenticated and anonymous users to use my endpoint that doesn't have any authentication and is on the public internet?", which is the wrong question.


exactly?

> A worry is the step will encourage other regimes that feel they have might to remove leaders they do not like and replace them with marionette-like figures

Go type "list Russian regime change operations from the last 20 years" in chatgpt.



I think people are overindexed on the US's failures to turn Islamic theocracies into democracies. The people in Venezuela want democracy. It's a fundamentally different situation.

> The people in Venezuela want democracy.

Venezuela had a democracy for decades. It's the US that has been trying to destroy it for decades because the venezuelans voted for the wrong guy. It's funny how we forgot that the US also tried to remove the previous elected leader of venezuela.


Last year the people decided to vote for an alternative and the dictator decided to stay in power.

[flagged]


No - we know Maduro lost the election. That's knowledge, not opinion. And he stayed in power, while crushing the opposition. Maduro is a garden variety dictator. Spectacularly corrupt, jails his political opponents, having taken over the media and so on.

How do you know? The official election council certified that he won. A bunch of foreign governments and US-aligned media claimed it was rigged. But the US has been trying to regime change them since they nationalized their oil.

You're trying to paint a picture that it's just the US and it's lackeys that claim the election was rigged.

In truth, we know that the election was neither free nor fair, with the government prosecuting and oppressing the opposition.

The Venezuelan opposition made a point of providing evidence that they won, most notably official tally sheets which collaborate that they won. The government did not produce evidence or even care to refute the opposition's claims.


A lot of my friends in Venezuela told me.

You should go talk to some venezuelans.


You'd think Machado winning the Nobel peace prize would be enough for people to not question the popularity of Maduro, but here we are, random keyboard warriors defending dictators nonstop.

> You'd think Machado winning the Nobel peace prize would be enough for people to not question the popularity of Maduro

You mean the woman advocating for the US to invade venezuela got the nobel prize? How shocking. It's almost as if the nobel prize is a political tool.

> but here we are, random keyboard warriors defending dictators nonstop.

"dictator". Sure. Everyone is a dictator and authoritarian.


Your comment doesn't make any sense. The Nobel Peace Prize isn't decided by Venezuelan people, it's decided by a council appointed by the Norwegian government.

Reminder that Kissinger won the Nobel Prize in his time. Winning the Nobel Prize means you align with US geopolitical interests, nothing more.

No, people can't just kick out an authoritarian dictator. Such rulers don't need democratic support to stay in power. Strong men only leave their palaces due to two reasons - death from old age or an even stronger power forcing them.

> No, people can't just kick out an authoritarian dictator.

If that was the case, the US wouldn't exist. Might want to brush up on american history.

> Such rulers don't need democratic support to stay in power.

They most certainly do. Once they lose it, they collapse internally. Read up on some history.

As I said, if maduro had lost the popular support, the US wouldn't have had to invade and kidnap maduro. The venezuelan people would have done so. The only time foreign intervention is required is when a significant portion of the populace supports the leader.


This is fundamentally incorrect. A dictator can oppress 90% of the people by just treating 10% of the population well, provided the 90% isn't allowed to heavily arm themselves anyway.

You jump from "some revolutions have happened" to "revolutions always happens and always succeed"...

By your logic why are there any tyrannies at all in the world? Do you really believe all governments are supported by their people and that oppression does not exist?


You people aren't serious

Given the US position in favor of Bolsanaro against Lula indicates that Trump is not interested in Democracy if it produces the wrong result. If Venezuelans elect a Socialist, they will immediately be out of our good graces.

> The people in Venezuela want democracy. It's a fundamentally different situation.

"We will, in fact, be greeted as liberators" - Dick Cheney (but I'm sure it'll work out this time)

There is a whole lot of directions this can go after we arrest the dictator, but a liberal democracy magically immediately popping isn't on my list. There might be one in the future but there will be a lot of chaos and violence between now and then.


What happened in Europe after WW2? Dick Cheney didn't invent the idea of America liberating a country and being greeted as liberators, it had happened before, specifically in countries that had a history of liberal democracy.

For some reason he thought it would apply to Islamic theocracies and it clearly didn't. Pattern matching Venezuela against Iraq or Afghanistan is an obvious mistake.


We aren't occupying Venezuela and rooting out everyone in the current regime and putting them on trial. We just arrested a handful of people leaving the rest of the government intact. It playing out like WW2 doesn't make sense

Trump has today, explicitly said that the US administration - specifically his administration - will run Venezuela, with boots on the ground, for as long as is necessary.

I was listening to the press conference and almost went back to edit my comment with a note about it. Honestly, coming out of that I have no idea if what is his saying is reality. As things stand and what we know, it doesn't make sense. We don't know about more troops currently on the ground. He said the VP has agreed to assist, but she is publicly saying very different things. I hate we are in a place as a country where we can't believe basic things about important topics our president says.

I think you are misquoting slightly. Trump said he's not afraid of putting 'boots on the ground' in the country if necessary, not they are confirmed.

Also in the Q&A he mentioned this was mostly targeting the protection of the oil extraction/American companies taking over, not the rest of the country.

(tho not sure how much we can really trust what he says)


> What happened in Europe after WW2? Dick Cheney didn't invent the idea of America liberating a country and being greeted as liberators, it had happened before, specifically in countries that had a history of liberal democracy.

Those countries were actually being liberated from a foreign power that had invaded them just a few years prior.

There are very few examples where a foreign nation overthrowing the indigenous government (no matter how despised that government may be) are greeted as liberators, and in those select few instances the sentiment is almost universally short lived.


> The people in Venezuela want democracy.

Let’s assume for a second this is true, and the US is genuinely helping by removing a dictator.

Why Venezuela? Why not one of the other dozens of countries in the world this is the case?

Hint: oil.


I don't know if you remember that Hugo Chavez was voted into power, had a legitimate mandate to dismantle the democracy that elevated him, and then his voters defended him against a violent coup to restore that democracy.

"had a legitimate mandate to dismantle the democracy"... citation needed.

I wonder if you would defend Trump for the same actions, and also don’t forget ‘dismantling free press’ in Hugo’s list of accomplishments.

I don't support Trump, but I would not support a foreign power unilaterally abducting him.

The funny part of that narrative is the US government currently being led by people who have been trying to tear down the concept of democracy in the US. Maybe once Venezuela has their democracy back, they can help out the people in the US?

What’s even funnier is that, in some kind of trial, Maduro should enjoy Presidential Immunity.

And the US want oil and other resources.

So Venezuela has to vote correctly otherwise it will get "freed" again


Going by what recently happened in Honduras, they won't even need to vote. The US will just choose for them!

How convenient.


Why would Washington try to get oil from Venezuela when its domestic oil industry produces all the oil the US needs (and if production were to decrease, the US economy could easily make up the shortfall by buying oil from Canada)?

It's not about needing the oil to use, it's about profit for American oil companies. Resource extraction from foreign countries at gunpoint is a major basis of the US economy.

US has a long history of overthrowing both democracies and dictators to allow their companies to extract resources lining the pockets of already rich industrialists.

The US intentionally uses only a fraction of its oil reserves so it can control the price, and will still have plenty when others run out.

Check out the capacity of the Alaska pipeline, and how much goes down it each day. Literally the least possible to keep it well maintained.


Has that got anything to do with why these[1] graphs of US oil and gas production are limited to "Lower 48 states". I found that restriction to be very strange.

[1] https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=66564


Domestic crude oil is mostly not compatible with US refineries, so it mostly gets exported. The US imports heavy crude, like that produced by Venezuela, for our domestic use.

Why would you buy oil from Canada when you can take oil from Venezuela?


>Domestic crude oil is mostly not compatible with US refineries

The oil produced in Texas is easy to refine. Some of it is exported as crude, and an approximately equal amount of heavy crude is imported because US refiners have a competitive advantage in refining it. It is not that US refiners cannot refine Texas crude: they make more money refining the heavy stuff or stuff with a high load of contaminants.

>Why would you buy oil from Canada when you can take oil from Venezuela?

But the US is not going to take it, just like they never took oil from Iraq after conquering that country. The value of all the oil produced worldwide in 2023 was about $1.7 trillion. Of course it cost a lot of money to extract the oil. That year the IRS collected over $4.7 trillion in tax revenue. The US government has easier ways of getting money than invading oil-rich countries.

The US does not want any country or economy in the Western Hemisphere to be stragically dependent on Russia or China, so kicking Chinese or Russians out of the oil industry in Venezuela might have been one goal of the current military action.


To hinder China, so sell it themselves, to prevent competition

Don’t forget I mentioned other resources too. Venezuela has more than oil.


Can you guess what resource the US is trying to procure by this military action?

I think you are trying to force an incorrect simplistic narrative on the situation. Obtaining natural resources is not an important motivation for US military action with the possible exception of US intervention in the Persian Gulf during the Cold War (and even there I see no evidence that the US was trying to get out of paying the going international rate for the oil as opposed to merely ensuring that willing sellers in the Gulf could continue to transport their oil over the ocean). Venezuela's cooperation with Moscow and Beijing is a much more likely motivation, i.e., US national security.


> Venezuela's cooperation with Moscow and Beijing is a much more likely motivation, i.e., US national security.

If that’s the case why pootin got a red carpet in Alaska instead of orange jumpsuit?

Why if ruzzia is such a “threat to national security”, current government of “no new wars” doesn’t help Ukraine?

Don’t forget that eliminating (or reducing its influence to nothing) ruzzia - would hurt China immensely. Two birds with one stone and all… also with a benefit of a true legitimacy of helping Ukraine and destroying ruzzian totalitarianism.


Can you tell me why Vance and others speak of stolen oil?

What oil was stolen? Whose oil was stolen?


Determining the goodness of a blatantly illegal action by its ultimate success is a very Machiavellian view. Why have laws if all that matters is the final result?

What kind of democracy do Venezuelans want and will it be the same kind of democracy Trump wants to install? What if they want a democracy that continues to be friendly towards Cuba and wary of the US? Will Trump accept that?

If your hypothetical plays out I'll say you were right.

The problem US has always had with Latin America is that it's population likes a Socialist flavour of Democracy.

That doesn't rub well to the ruthless capitalist ideals of America. That's the reason why the US has destabilized the region again and again.


Boy I wish I was still this naive

"the common people sew dragon banners and pray for your return"

I can talk to Venezuelans and see videos of them celebrating in the streets.

For your own sake I hope you realize you are being shown those videos specifically to manipulate your opinion on this.

I can talk to them. I can talk to the Venezuelan refugees, who came here not because they are "political refugees" like some claim but because there was a famine in Venezuela.

None of that implies that what comes next will be any better, and to think otherwise is simply being ignorant of history.

I don't think the US has any interest in a democratic and stable middle east.

It's much easier and cheaper to extract resources from a balkanized region.


The US already has a refugee crisis because of Maduro's leadership, that refugee crisis is one of the reasons for this.

It should if it can do it without triggering WW3.

edit: The person I'm responding to edited their comment, it was originally something along the lines of

"Why doesn't the US topple Russia's government then"


Does this actually use the cloudflare worker runtime or is this just a way to run code in v8 isolates?

It's a custom V8 runtime built with rusty_v8, not the actual Cloudflare runtime (github.com/openworkers/openworkers-runtime-v8). The goal is API compatibility – same Worker syntax (fetch handler, Request/Response, etc.) so you can migrate code easily. Under the hood it's completely independent.

The chat history feature makes the product worse, I had to turn it off.


Agreed, I don't have a single user who finds a large number of old chats useful.


I'm a heavy user of ChatGPT, and this is exactly why I haven't switched. I frequently search my old chats, or pick up one I started weeks or even months ago.


The US has been largely tariff free since the 1900s and it's the largest economy in the world.


Remind me where I can buy a Chinese EV?

And I assume there’s no government subsidies to allow US private sectors to compete globally because free market right?

Right?


I forgot to put in my comment "until recently". And the US auto industry does such so using that as your argument in favor of tariffs doesn't really work.


The 1960s+ chicken tax would like a word. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax


Yes, trucks are one of the few areas where there have been tariffs. And unsurprisingly American automakers are now completely uncompetitive.


You and your downvote brigade can continue to hit my posts but it won’t change the fact the US has been subsidizing our agriculture sectors and oil and gas to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars for a LONG time.

Anyone claiming the US is a completely free market is either uninformed or a delusional nationalist.


I didn't downvote you once, I don't do it to people I'm discussing things with out of principle.


We don't know how to build it anymore


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

Search: