So the question is why this hit Youtube and Youtube TV so hard. Presumably they’re relying on ephemeral instances being able to get certs immediately, or something like that.
For persistent services using the affected ACME API, the window is usually 30 days.
But that didn’t stop Youtube and Youtube TV from going down hard. I imagine they’re provisioning ephemeral VMs or service instances and relying on them being able to get certs immediately, or something like that.
Fair suspicion in 2026 — but we actually started drafting that announcement in early 2023 before first committing it here: https://github.com/jrtberlin/aos2.0-post. As a non native speaker i sure ran my commits through grammar polishing multiple times over the years. And i am genuinely curious now what to avoid to not sound like an LLM if you could dig out one or two examples.
FWIW as someone who sadly has about 10% of his brain constantly engaged in AI detection when I read HN, absolutely nothing about the announcement struck me as feeling AI generated.
(I feel guilty for pointing it out but I guess it's actually a compliment in this context: I even saw a beautifully reassuring mis-conjugated verb elsewhere on the website. I wonder if LLMs will have to start injecting these errors to give us an authentic feel. Maybe they already have).
I think we are at a point now where just coz AI is so prevalent, every post on any programming forum will have at least one comment saying "AI slop".
Not on this article, but everywhere nowadays are hints of AI. For example using emoticons on the beginning of each sentence or never really going deep into the topic. The complete lack of grammatical errors is another tip, unless the prompter asks to write minor errors and pretend to be a human.
Wouldn't be suprised that before the end of this year we see more website declaring themselves to be "human-only zones", considering we won't be able to match the speed and quantity and replies from bots. Making it difficult to hold proper conversations.
This is one theory about the controversial age identification currently being implemented happily by social media companies: it's actually about human identification. That's the new captcha.
Conflating New Scientist with all modern journalism is a category error. New Scientist has been a zombie mag for going on two decades at this point. As with many magazines, the internet killed it.
> Now programming is a means to an end [...] or simply an unwanted chore to be avoided.
It was always this, for everyone other than programmers.
This reminds me a little of the Go champion (the game, not the language) who announced he was giving up the game after a computer beat him. It's a bit like giving up running because cars are faster.
Love the guy trying to crush his red telephone handset in the CP/M-86 ad. I assume he’s just been told he has to reenter the Kermit assembler code and start again.
The assumption in your comment is that those changes were all net good. In hindsight though, the automobile has had possibly existential costs for humanity, the internet has provided most benefit to those who most abuse its power, and so on. In the end, it doesn’t seem as though you’ve actually made any sort of case.
Is it? Do you include everyone that’s died or lost a loved one due to personal automobiles in that assessment?
We are so far post automobile that it’s hard to compare, but many of the benefits are illusionary when you consider how society has evolved with them as commutes for example used to be shorter. Similarly the air used to be far cleaner and that’s after we got rid of leaded gas and required catalytic converters decades ago.
How many people have lived or had a loved one saved due to automobiles?
We have the benefit of hindsight but we're also making judgment calls looking back on fuzzy recollections, forgetting just how the past used to be before an innovation came along.
I agree it’s difficult to do these calculations as society evolves with technology. Trains enable long distance evacuation from hurricanes. Street cars and subways allow for medical transportation but it looks very different than an ambulance. Similarly do we exclude helicopters assuming cars were simply banned rather than our failing to design IC engines or whatever.
That said, there are modern enclaves without cars mostly on islands or in very remote locations. They make due just fine without cars, it’s the low population density that’s at issue for medical care.
The automobile on its own was actually far less polluting than the horse wrt. air quality. It's just that there's a whole lot more of the former than there ever was of the latter. Even wrt. climate change, it turns out that horses produce methane emissions which are far worse for the climate than carbon dioxide.
That reason is along the lines of, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
Coal miners will fight for coal mines, the oil industry will fight for dependence on oil, and so on. Sometimes they’re aware of what they’re doing, but in the case of a comment like the above, apparently not so much.
I often wonder that if cable news was around say, during the American Civil War, how likely would the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments have passed? I'd say extremely unlikely.
Throughout our entire race as a species, abusers have always fucked the commons to the extreme using whatever tools they have available.
I mean take something as "innocuous" as the cotton gin, prior to the cotton gin there was a real decline in slavery but once it became extremely easier to process cotton slavery skyrocketed. Some of the worse laws the US has ever passed, the fugitive slave act, was during this period.
To think that technological progress means prosperity is extremely delusional.
We're still dealing with the ramifications of nuclear weapons and the likelihood that someone makes a committed nuclear attack will assuredly happen again in our species, just hoping that it doesn't take out all life on Earth when it happens.
Seriously, these types of comments are always really narrow in their view.
Industrialization has rapidly accelerated planet wide climate change that will have disastrous effects in many of our lifetimes. A true runaway condition will really test the merit of those billionaire bunkers.
All for what? a couple hundred years of "advancement"? A blink in the lifespan of humanity, but dooms everyone to a hyper-competitive death drive towards an unlivable world.
As a society, our understanding of "normal" has narrowed down to the last 80 years of civilization. A normal focused around consumption, which stands to take it all away just as fast.
The techno-optimists never seriously propose any meaningful solution to millions losing their livelyhoods and dignity so Sam Altman can add an extension to his doomsday bunker. They just go along with it as if they'll be invited down to weather the wet-bulb temperature.
Kennan was arguing a Russian position, which makes sense given his long focus on Russia, and time there. What he wrote doesn’t actually support the idea that the West “started” anything.
Strengthening a defensive alliance is not “starting” something, that’s just the usual narcissistic gaslighting used by people with nefarious intent.
(Or an unrelated failure, of course)
reply