The AI Enhancements section was interesting. I've been wondering about the best practices for agents interacting with long-running dev servers, and Astro 7's approach (run in background and have a logs command) seems like a good model.
Of these models, only Kimi had anything on me and it was pretty inaccurate.
When Fable was accessible, I asked it about myself and it had some accurate information about me. It's neat. It feels a tiny bit like I got to sign the Voyager probe. I wonder if Fable was trained on a significantly different selection of data or if it's just better at retaining rare details it saw in its training.
Is there any interpretation where Amazon is involved but for a reason besides trying to screw over Anthropic? I don't see why Amazon would act against Anthropic when they have a deal to offer Anthropic models on AWS.
LLMs remind me of being a kid again being in wonder of all the possible things that could be done with a computer that haven't been figured out yet. The internet was relatively new and everyone had their own ideas of what that would enable. Fast forward to a few years ago and it was easy to believe that a lot of the low-hanging fruit of things an individual could do with the internet, apps, 3d graphics, etc, had been decently picked over and that things were stabilizing. Now I have no idea again what computing will look like in 5 years and it's exciting.
If we already were at the point that AI could self-direct effectively, then the world would already be very different (eg AI-driven technological progress and unemployment) in a way that we might have wished we prepared for more.
They believe they're going to eventually develop AI that's capable of recursive self improvement into world-redefining super-intelligence. I wouldn't expect someone in that position to risk giving away their lead. I expect we're going to see more of the top labs selectively holding back their best stuff.
This isn't that surprising after it was reported on that he had notes about claiming to "come out as a Republican and against the woke agenda" as a PR plan to defend himself. (https://gizmodo.com/sbf-floated-coming-out-republican-tucker...) I wonder if Trump is selling pardons and whether SBF still has the means for it. It's depressing that the US's state of affairs is such that this might be a workable strategy for him.
No, the reference to May 19 in the article is about a previous supply chain attack against AntV (https://www.stepsecurity.io/blog/shai-hulud-here-we-go-again...). I think there may be some copy-paste mistakes where they reused part of that previous article and didn't contextualize it correctly.
The npm package `@redhat-cloud-services/chrome` version 2.3.1, which was part of this current supply chain attack, was published on June 1. The malicious package version is no longer listed on npmjs.com's web UI since it was taken down, but the publish date of 2.3.1 can still be seen in https://registry.npmjs.org/@redhat-cloud-services/chrome by searching for the version number there, and the publish date was 2026-06-01T10:54:42.121Z.
I find the article extremely annoying for not having a clear timeline of when these malicious package versions were available.
Even for English speakers, the subtitle experience with pirated movies is often lacking. Movies with non-English-speaking characters are often meant to have subtitles for their dialog and not for English speakers by default, but many pirated versions don't do this. I recently saw discussions online of a lot of people saying they went an embarrassingly long time without knowing there were supposed to be subtitles for the aliens in District 9 or the mute hand-signing girl in The Boys.
But there is a second level of people reviewing packages on npm. They're the ones that report issues like the github issue this HN thread is linked to, and they very frequently get malicious npm packages taken down within a day of publishing. The big issue is just that not everyone is using a cooldown to avoid packages less than a day old and so people who install new packages at unlucky times don't get the benefit of that layer of review.