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

> a bit of time

A bit of time is an understatement.

I used Wireshark to analyze various things (mostly smart home) over the years, but now CC does in minutes what it would take me a few hours before - and provides dedicated, custom made panels for whatever I want.

As an example - debugging KNX magistrale in my home, previously it was either wireshark and a ton of regexes, handwritten scripts (or official software that was terrible), now you just tell CC what you want to extract, and you get beautiful real-time views of the activity.

One thing is previewing the traffic, but then CC can easily fetch docs for any device it finds on the network, if it has an API (official or not), utilize it and do whatever you want.


There were few systems like claude in the past, to testing rulebook is not really written yet. And far from obvious.

LLM evals are well established, are these not applicable here?

Also, many of us have lived in countries actually freed thanks to the west’s (mustly us) intervention, and we felt the support during the Russian occupation pre 1989

Many of us have lived or live in countries that are constantly affected and destabilized by past and even modern interventions from the U.S. (the only blame the rest of the "West" bears here is just watching without ever acknowledging the harm done). Just look at Latin America.

edit: Not trying to say "US bad, China good." Just there is perspective to everything.


This is important.

Just a couple of days ago we found out that 4 undercover CIA agents were operating here in Mexico: https://www.infobae.com/mexico/2026/04/22/no-eran-dos-eran-c...

It has been knokwn that US government operatives provide weapons to Mexican cartels ( https://grothman.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?Document... ).

So, yeah, the US is no "blanca palomita" at all. And those of us suffering from their actions have learned that all powerful nations have good and bad things. Here in Mexico, we've got BYD cars, and they are AMAZING. Also being able to use DeepSeek is so cool.


If your government refuses to stop the flow of drugs into the US by addressing cartels don't be surprised if the US delivers weapons to said cartels so they can have some infighting going on.

If the mexican government would actually make work of dismantling the organized trade, there would be no incentive to deliver them weapons to shoot each other.


Demand, markets are always driven by demand.

So that’s an excuse?

That’s your understanding of why Intelligence backs/works with cartels?!

Oh honey. Black budgets. Cashflow, flow of power.

The “Mexican government” was headed by CIA assets multiple times in recent history: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34903090

https://jacobin.com/2023/06/mexico-jose-lopez-portillo-decla...

What are you expecting Mexico to do, again?


supply is never an issue, USA would supply poison to entire planet if the demand was there. blaming Mexico for the sickness of our society is very rich (but often repeated)

I never pretend supply is a monocausal issue, but it is a contributing issue.

You prefer to believe in monocausal scapegoat mechanisms? Stick your head in the sand at your own peril.

You claim US would supply the poison with pleasure itself, but then why is it being imported?


My Spanish isn't great, but it seems like the CIA agents were going on missions with Mexican authorities. Is that an issue?

They were declared cia officers with black diplomatic passports.

> Just a couple of days ago we found out that 4 undercover CIA agents were operating here in Mexico

was that a surprise? i'd be more surprised if it were only 4.


They were actually 10 haha, according to the article.

And some of us have a sore lower back after playing tennis, while some of us have terminal stage four cancer. Who is to say which is worse?

I think right now there's a kind of global propaganda competition playing out and the thing that does the most damage is false equivalences that encourage loss of perspective.


The only instance of false equivalence I see is the mention of lower back pain vs cancer.

You cant compare qualia of suffering. At least not with our current technology. Thats the point - they both involve suffering but that doesn’t mean one is inherently worse than the other. The details and experience matter which got glossed over in these stupid debates- hence loss of perspective.

Honestly I had to read the wiki page of false equivalence and you’re not asserting the fallacy correctly.


we don't need machinery or a mechanism to compare it, natural selection works just fine for 99% of all species on earth.

The US committed massive treaty violations and genocide, on top of huge imperialist destabilization of many sovereign nations. Tianmen square and the Uyghers are bad, but we're straight up evil.

The Chinese government regularly kidnaps its own citizens, who have no due process rights, and is currently engaged in a mass genocide of a racial group they consider “inferior.”

Additionally, they have supported Russia consistently during their occupation of Ukraine, and just install leaders for life.

I’m confused how you think the US is worse. I say this as an Afroindigenous person who is very clear about the harms white supremacy has inflicted upon the cultures I am a part of.


> Additionally, they have supported Russia consistently during their occupation of Ukraine

And who are we supporting since roughly 01/2025? :-)


Just on the genocide scorecard, it's us 0, China 1. Ask a native american what they think of the US govt.

tell us your story

Us? wow, tell us your story

And which countries are those?

Comments like this is spot on.

Communism is the cool thing now for young people. China propaganda on TikTok is huge. Huge. And I notice the third world eating it up due to resentement. And young people in my country of Sweden.

But mention how Poland, Baltics, Eastern EU never ever ever would go back to communism and they have 0 arguments.


I see young people advocating for socialism a lot in Canada, but rarely communism as in communist Russia and communist China. As others have said, old style communism isn't even around anymore. Russia is a fake democracy and China is a strange blend of one party rule and capitalism.

I don't think it does anyone any good to throw around naive and simple terms like communism. Focus on issues like public healthcare, breaking monopolies, basic incomes, and so on. We'll get along a lot better that way.


canada has our own history of socialism in the form of crown corps and healthcare. why wouldnt we lean into our own successful practices?

Because they'll make you worse off the more you scale them up. It's like pointing out that a drink of alcohol with a friend led to positive results so why not lean heavily into drinking? And the answer is because it is something that people enjoy that can be tolerated in small amounts but isn't much of a strategy if the goal is a happy, healthy outcome.

That's ridiculous. The countries with the highest quality of living all have strong social programs. If you want an analogy for alcoholism look at the US. Capitalism works here, so let's use it everywhere!

I'm tempted to copy what you wrote as a response without the "That's ridiculous" part. It isn't ridiculous, it is just a factual description of reality. The reason the US can afford the strong social programs is because of its heavy commitment to capitalism. If a country is poor and weak then it can't afford to endure the pain that a strong social program causes. Poor countries just can't sustain populations of people who consume resources and don't create anything especially valuable. If you scale up the social programs too far at some point the wealth destruction becomes intolerable; there's some optimal amount of damage that can be accepted and "lean in to socialism" isn't the best strategy to find that balance because by the time the pain becomes intolerable it has already happened.

"communist Russia"

China hasn't been communist for a really long time. It didn't truly stay communist for a long time either, it was more of an authoritarian autarky run by a nutjob.

What is is today is state sponsored capitalism. You have cronyism, nepotism, lobbying and rent seeking. All of which are also found in the US.

China's social spending is far lower than many other developed nations.


Yeah, there are some Eastern EU countries where populist parties still milk the older voters with Soviet nostalgia. Yet, as usual, the same politicians who suggest how good things were back then are usually very happy to enjoy Western goods, freedom of movement, private property and EU funds.

But generally, people still remember the Soviet concentration camps, censorship, shortages of basic goods and the inborn corruption that came with the Soviet implementation of communism.

Communism ideologies seem to thrive among the young in (pseudo) democratic societies. That’s a paradox for me, as communism seems to exist because of the wealth distribution that capitalism creates.

Now, what the EU is doing right now with all that bureaucratic machine and the leftist social agenda, is another topic.


Go to Shenzhen or Shanghai, if that's what communism looks like, then it has already won. A few weeks ago, when I was in Shanghai, I went for a walk and saw more McLarens and Ferraris in a few hours than I've seen in New York, Berlin, and Paris combined.

They're more capitalist than we (the West) ever were. Communism is basically only something that remains in the name of the party. Their version of capitalism just has a lot more state involvement and capital controls, which lets them plan over longer time horizons more successfully and pivot to new priorities much faster.


Don’t forget, it also allows them to regularly and consistently jail citizens either zero recourse.

I promise you they wouldn’t be getting released like we have happening in the US.


>when I was in Shanghai, I went for a walk and saw more McLarens and Ferraris in a few hours than I've seen in New York, Berlin, and Paris combined.

Sounds awful imo.

Yet when they want beautiful nature and buildnings etc they go here to Europe.


> Yet when they want beautiful nature and buildnings etc they go here to Europe.

You need to be joking or you never were in T1 city in China.


It's funny how this comment (which states nothing but facts) was upvoted and then some poeple were coping with reality by downvoting it.

Very much. Try to start a union in China and see how communist that country is. China is essentially a right-wing hypercapitalist country run by a dictatorship.

To be fair, I don't know where starting a union under Mao would get you

How many not-so-smart and not-so-intelligent people can claim Russia occupied you? Never mind, your liberation by the West will come back to haunt you, mark my words... and very soon! You'll remember how well you lived during the years of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact!

those countries were liberated 35 years ago, GDP and other essential metrics increased significantly. How longer they should wait to start feeling remorse?

I remember constant grocery deficits, no meat, no cheese, etc in groceries. and all other kind of deficits. But there were rotten potatoes, and 2 types of bread! Glory to our leaders! fun times, you say.

I did a lot of AI images to show my friends and enjoy. There was definitely a benefit to society.

And my friends used AI as a replacement of stock photos and graphics in their products which offer a ton to society.


> There was definitely a benefit to society.

Because otherwise they would have gone out to the street and mugged old ladies?

> And my friends used AI as a replacement of stock photos and graphics in their products which offer a ton to society.

Yeah, that's the negative contribution. They're basically ripping off artists and designers. If those products offer a ton, some of that money could have gone towards them instead of OpenAI, Anthropic, etc.


We’ll probably do the same we did with electricity, water, banking and telecomunnication - regulate (even in US) so that everyone has more or less equal access to it.

Regulate so that you price out equal access to it.

Small players can't afford cost of regulation.

Then create a layer around that which all small players pay into so they can participate regardless of whether they do or not - something like insurance or licensing.

Modernity.


Ideal for whom? For society in general, I don’t think so.

I think you may be placing too much value on the output of these machines which use tons of energy, generate pollution (both noise and chemical), and generate output that's worse then what a human can do. We would be better off if these LLMs didn't exist.

Average person in US reducing his/her meat intake by 1/4 would do much, much more for environment compared with completely scrapping entire AI infrastructure worldwide. For some reason people concerned with environmental impact of AI get really angry whenever I point this out.

The average person here would do more still by just taking one less flight. It's air travel that really blows individual emissions out of the water.

I think it would obviously better for society.

If the phones with replaceable batteries break more often (and they most likely will), then people will buy them more often, not less.

Also, a new battery is how much - €100 for an iPhone battery? It's not that expensive.


Why would they break more often? I don't really see that.

We have thousands of Xcovers (also replaceable) in the factories at work and they break no more often than the regular phones in the office environment. In fact people treat them pretty roughly because they're handling heavy requirement and you know how well people look after equipment they didn't pay for :) They're not perfect but they walk the walk.

Another point: I know several people that have Fairphones where almost every component can be user-replaced and I've held them but I don't see them being any more fragile than any other phone, really. And these are not rugged models.

And a Fairphone battery is 40€. An Xcover battery (including NFC antenna which is weirdly enough in the battery) costs similar. The screen 90€. All a lot cheaper than Apple, probably because there is no labor cost. You can just do it yourself or ask a friend who's handy.


Nice idea. I think the reason it's not communicated as such is that then companies would be expected to advertise time on battery when charged to 100%, not 125%.

With cameras you don't care about every mm of width, nor about how resistant it is to falls. With phones you do.

I, for one, don't welcome that change. I'd be ok with paying someone a bit extra to replace the battery. I mean, I'd be ok if I had a battery die in my phone in the last 10 years, which I don't remember it did.


Just to be clear replaceable doesn't mean removable/hot-swappable in this context. There doesn't have to be a battery compartment, the battery can still be glued in place. The phone can still be sealed.

Manufacturers only have to make it possible for users to open and close the phone to replace the battery without damage, using common tools.


Personally I’m confused why people say they want a thinner phone while carrying a phone that’s keeps getting larger every model.

When was the last time you kept a phone longer than 2-3 years? That’d explain why you haven’t had one die.

Assuming you do get a new phone regularly, easy battery replacement will probably help the resale value of your own a fair bit - the labour cost of a battery replacement is priced into most older phones on the second hand market.


My average time on a smartphone is now at 4 years, feels like it's going to 5 pretty soon. [Last upgrade was for USB-C. Next upgrade will be for on-device LLM. It's wild how approximately 0% of what Apple has done outside of the USB-C connector has mattered to me in the last 10+ years - low-light photography is probably the only other thing that comes to mind. ]

I've had two battery replacements since 2015. One of them was required, the other was mostly optional (battery had dropped to 90% on my iPhone - which was probably sufficient).

USB-C - that was an awesome requirement that it was unclear whether Apple was ever going to do.

User Replaceable Battery? Zero desire, particularly if it reduces water resistance on the device. Dozens of things I've wanted from a phone - being able to replace the battery has never even entered my mind as something I wanted.


Your cycle is 4 years, and you’ve had two phone batteries replaced in 11 years? That’s 2/2.75 phones.

Ok, one was optional, and let’s round up to 3. So 1/3 of your phones. Kinda sounds like you would benefit from replaceable batteries.

Regardless, those 4-5 year old phones likely went to ewaste immediately or soon after you were done with them because the cost of replacing the battery was less than their resale value after 4-5 years.

That’s a pattern our planet literally can’t handle. Wars over digging up minerals using slave labour then putting them in phones for 3-5 years just to send them to have children get chemical burns stripping the metals out of them.

My last computer lasted me 11 years, with two battery replacements along the way. My phone should do the same, just as easily.


What really annoys me is Apple EOLed the iPhone 8 and then came out with a virtually identical SE version. Of course they soon discontinued the SE too…

Maybe they updated the CPU slightly but screen and camera were identical.

I would have kept my iPhone 8 if they kept updating the software. Yet somehow they can manage update the SE software despite looking the same as the iPhone 8…

I know there is a cost and overhead toward supporting old platforms. But for the premium on these devices and the level of waste generated, manufacturers can still do better…

I’d prefer no new features and only security updates… perhaps I’m weird.


The SE got a 2 Generation newer CPU. The iPhone 8 lost software support the same day all other devices with an A11 lost it.

> Yet somehow they can manage update the SE software despite looking the same as the iPhone 8...

Are you seriuos? What does the look of a phone have to do with how long it is supported?


Look doesn’t matter but they seem to be supporting exactly the same feature set as before.

They aren’t trying to support all the flashy stuff done on newer models… Hence, it seems like they could have easily made it work on the older models but chose higher profits instead.


Not weird. The last few os updates have made my phone laggy and slow. I want security updates, i don’t want new features that kill my battery life and usability.

The iPhone SE (2020) cpu is like twice as fast as the iPhone 8 cpu, lol.

Note that your 2 best features were usb-c and replacement batteries. Both were government mandated against unethical behavior of Apple.

That's what governments are for.


Apple had been switching their various iOS devices to USB-C for several years before the EU decided to mandate it, so I don't know how you can assert that them switching the iPhone to USB-C was because they were forced to. It looks more like the EU just had lucky timing and told them to do something they were already doing.

I am curious where you got this impression?

Apple fought it the whole way, commissioned studies to show it was a bad idea, etc etc. This after they had a decade prior been subject to the same thing with micro USB and skirted that agreement by shipping more unnecessary cables.

https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/02/02/what-the-eu-manda...


The sensible thing for them to do is fight regulation, even if their underlying strategy is going towards a compatible goal. They do not want to set a precedent that they can be bullied into changing their product roadmap based on the whims of government.

> subject to the same thing with micro USB

And thank goodness for that! Micro USB is a disaster, they did their customers a favor. When I was still rocking Android phones back then, I kept a box of Micro USB cables on hand because I was having to toss them so often.


Getting deep into apologetics here.

No disagreement on micro USB, it was a terrible standard.


Laptops, the ipads. Phones and airpods came after the eu law. Debatable, but it seems to me like they consider the ipad in the same class as a laptop, so it got grouped with those. Otherwise why did it take 5 years between the first ipad with usb-c and the first iphone?

The iPhone had by far the biggest ecosystem of Lightning accessories, the biggest base of users with Lightning cords. It was a foregone conclusion that a bunch of people were going to be angry about losing their Lightning accessories and having to buy new cords, and another bunch of people were going to be happy to switch their last non-USB-C device over. Apple needed to find the crossover point where the latter would outnumber the former.

I very much miss the ability to never use my phone on a charging cable. Just swap the battery on an external charger and go. 5 seconds to charge to full. It was freeing and simple

I always wanted an internal battery of like 1 minute, so I could hot swap batteries. Then the battery capacity would be largely irrelevant. What would be cool is to have a large case that could charge the battery multiple times like with ear buds. The magnetic wireless charging blocks that just stick on the back of the phone are pretty fair compromise though.

I've had the same phone for over 6 years now (iPhone 11). It's a bit slower now, but I suspect that's more to do with software changes than anything else. In particular the battery is still in pretty good shape.

Sort of a funny example since "batterygate" centered on degraded iPhone batteries in which Apple argued the best possible move is to throttle phones so they don't shutdown unexpectedly.

Most people would argue the best outcome is spending <100$ and 1 min of your time to have your phone restored to like-new speed.


Not sure what replacable has to do with thickness.

When I bought my first smartpone, a Moto G (1st gen) it was as flat as any phone most people carried around at the time (2014, I think). And the battery was replaceable.

I think also Samsung phones had replaceable batteries then. And this was the case for a few years after. Until it wasn't.

Devices didn't suddenly get thin when batteries were glued in. Why would they?


The Samsung S5 was very thin. Too thin imo. And it had a replaceable battery

My grandma is still daily driving my ancient Galaxy S5 Neo. When someone says thinness is opposed to removable battery, or water resistance, or headphone jack, or durability, or SD card... I always think of it.

I'm not sure about too thin (although I switched to the qi-charging back after a year), the replacements /where/ thinner.. but lost the IR blaster, replaceable battery, eventually μSD housing, eventually headphone jack.

I don't know, it just felt flimsy. But in almost a "flimsy meaning it can handle a beating" way. It sure did.

I did ruin the water protection on mine pretty quickly though, because the back panel was made of plastic and was... flimsy. It basically became a fidget toy.

When thinking of how flagship phone producers are going to keep making sexy phones that also keep their watertightness, my biggest worry is repeated stress from any removable component becoming a fidget toy


A replaceable battery needs protection. One in the device gets protection from the device.

The replaceable battery is still inside the case. How is it more protected because "glue"?

I also replaced glued batteries in phones following ifixit instructions a few times (using a hair dryer/heat gun).

They didn't have any less or more "protection" than the replaceable ones. They looked exactly the same apart from the connectors ofc.

Please substantiate your claim. Until then I call it BS.


We've had thin smartphones with replaceable batteries 15 years ago. That was the standard. Galaxy S5 was the last one in that series, and it's not looking too different from today. It was even IP rated for water!

Batteries also don't really die, but you get shorter and shorter life. When a device that barely could make it through 2 days of use now survives for less than one, an "upgrade" seems nicer than it really would've been if you could just swap the battery.


The S5 was IP67 rated but only if the USB port flap was sealed. Modern phones like the S24 and iPhones are IP68 rated without covers.

As someone who spends a lot of time outdoors in the rain, giving up superior IP68 water resistance for a replaceable battery that I'll never replace will be a downgrade for me.


GoPros are IP68 rated without a housing and have removable batteries. This is not an impossible task.

Phone makers do not want you to be able to replace batteries easily because it will extend the life of a phone. End of story.


Do you toss it in the trash when you’re done? Pop it in a drawer to rot? Ewaste will bury us all, conflict minerals and all. Replaceable batteries are a net good for humanity, and i personally believe that the smart people at phone companies can solve the problem of waterproofing even with replaceable batteries

I trade the phone in for the new model as God and Steve Jobs intended.

Right. So ewaste.

No. Apple refurbishes and reuses the majority of trade-in phones. They recycle a small fraction. None of it ends up in landfills. In my case, they aren't paying me hundreds of dollars for my old phone to throw it in a landfill.

in another comment you just said "When was the last time you kept a phone longer than 2-3 years?" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47834195#47842655

how do you square that position with your stance here on e-waste as it applies to other people who are apparently ruining the planet?


What? I think you misunderstood…

The comment above mine you linked to said they never had battery problems. I was saying they probably don’t keep their phones long enough to encounter battery problems. I wasn’t suggesting that’s a good thing - just that it’s very common. And if you need me to defend my position with action: I’m 5 years in on this phone and planning to do a diy battery swap soon to keep it running a little longer.


IP_7 means it's ok with water immersion for up to 30 minutes, down to 1m. You can go swimming with an IP_7 rated device.

IP_8 is "more than 1m, more than 30min water immersion" rating.

"outdoors in the rain" needs IP_5 rating if you want to be safe. You do not need a dive watch to go out in rain.

Even non-waterproof devices are not exactly made of sugar. My first iphone was a 3gs. I want running with the device in an armband. My rain precautions were plugging in 3.5mm earphones, and pointing the charge port downwards. Regularly got caught in rain with it, and the device was completely fine two years later when I sold it.


Ports develop rust if exposed to elements. This applies to USB-C ports too. That's why all seriously rugged phones has flaps for every ports with all-plastic enclosures over metal frames(not all waterproof equipment are seawater rated; they have to be specifically designed and tested to be resistant to galvanic corrosion if the water to be submerged in is not deionized or at least potable).

Urban rainproof phones like S24 and iPhone aren't actually intended to be left drenched in mud or seawater, so they don't have to be equipped to be resistant against pieces of soil or soaked driftwood jammed in the charge port.


That's true. More-modern phones can be IP-rated without a cover for the USB port like the S5 required.

That doesn't mean that a modern phone of vaguely S5 shape, with an S5-esque battery door, can't be fitted with a more modern USB port, though. Does it?

They seem like very unrelated things.

(Those modern ports, by the way? They're pretty slick when they work right. They detect moisture and turn off the bit of normally-externally-available power to help prevent galvanic corrosion.)


"...that I'll never replace", I mean you will replace the whole phone, including the battery? (Unless this is your last phone, in which case you won't be affected anyway :P)

Most digital cameras above mid ranges are made of painted Magnesium alloy material for both weight and durability. Only cosmetic parts are made of Aluminum and plastics. They don't talk much about those because all the remaining companies in the market are from one same country that don't speak English that isn't China, and there is no differentiation to be made in that area.

Both of those things are also important in cameras, there is even sites that compare the size such as https://camerasize.com/. Cameras have got smaller in recent years and it makes the size makes a big difference to whether you take it with you on not or fits in your pocket or not for compact cameras. Ricoh’s gr4 camera is 0.5mm thinner than the previous model (gr3). Cameras are essentially smaller than they would be otherwise because they have replaceable batteries. People who need at more power usually use several batteries rather than use a bigger camera with more capacity.

Cameras also need to withstand drops for similar reasons to phones, it’s in you hand and you could drop it, also tripods can fall over, car mounts fall off etc.


> care about every mm of width

I think you mean thickness?

Extra width is sold as a feature.

I don’t understand the obsession with reducing thickness.

Why is a thinner phone more desirable than a thicken one?


I don't think it is more desirable, the iPhone Air has reportedly sold way below expectations.

I don't care about every mm of width, and don't understand those that do. A phone up to 3/4" fits into any pocket that a 1/4" one does.

I had multiple android phones with replaceable batteries and many were no thicker than modern phones, especially once you've added the protective case.


The main issue of paying someone to teplace the battery is procuring the battery in the first place.

For example, good luck finding good apple batteries in regions where there is no official apple service.

Most Chinese parts are inferior: for example rates for max 500 cycles instead of 1000


Just to clarify something: afaik official apple batteries are “chinese” in origin.

Sure, but that doesn’t mean every chinese battery is the same.

For some reason there are no 3rd-party batteries of the same quality as Apple’s. And Apple doesn’t distribute them freely to other countries.


You can just say “aftermarket” or “knockoff” or even “3rd party”. They all get the same point across and don’t rely on an outdated stereotype about chinese manufacturing.

Stereotypes are not fiction.

Become a nation that cherishes quality and this will change.

Noone forced them to produce junk, manufacturing prowess nonwithstanding


Nice!

What I missed from the writeup were some specific cases and how did you test that all this orchestration delivers worthwhile data (actionable and full/correct).

E.g. you have a screenshot of the AI supply chain - more of these would be useful, and also some info about how you tested that this supply chain agrees with reality.

Unless the goal of the project was to just play with agent architecture - then congrats :)


Great advice!

For demo purpose and to attract attention, i was primarily picking some cases with cool visuals (like the screenshot of the AI supply chain you mentioned). we have some internal eval and will try to add more cases in the public repo for reference.


More signs of the AI bubble. Completely unprofessional behavior ("cool visuals" not "real results"). And don't give me that "hacker culture" bullshit, these people are targeting Wall Street as paying customers.

would it be more professional in your opinion if i am claiming i make $xxxxx via this tool? I thought i have clearly stated that cool visuals is for >demo purpose and to attract attention. I do not want to post any dramatic statement to trick people using it. This is an early stage open source project to help investors and traders organize their thoughts, not an auto money making machine that guarantee profit. its the mind who use the tool decide if they will profit from market.

>And don't give me that "hacker culture" bullshit

I couldn’t help but be genuinely curious: if you believe AI is a bubble and aren’t a fan of hacker culture, then why are you here on Hacker News?

great to hear your input anyway!


First of all this project is great and finance is ready for a disruption like this. I'm sure a lot of good research and development went into this.

Quality research indeed doesn't always make money, so I agree that it doesn't make sense to present these type of metrics. But at the same type, it will be hard to trust this sort of thing immediately without having a way to validate its output. At the very least I would like to know that the financial metrics it calculates (esp those based on 20/30 data points) are correct. Looks like there is some transparency build in and that's a good thing.

But people that are not a pro in investment research wouldn't know that it messed up a certain metric and therefore the output is different from what it tells me. Or maybe it is not messing up entirely, but a certain sector-specific detail doesn't get picked up making a signal less strong than the output made you believe. Maybe you already have it but if not maybe you could get some sort of validation layer added, that could also serve as some sort of customisable calculation engine, I'd use it right away.


Thanks, very valid point. We are building towards a benchmark as well. hope we can share more quantitive metric soon.

"Cool visuals" are "dramatic statements". Neither have any substance nor basis in reality.

What would this possibly add over existing AI chatbots if all it's for is "organizing thinking"? There is no value add here.

I love hacker culture. This isn't hacking, this is the exact opposite of that.


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

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

Search: