131–140 of 1001 posts
Does one really need to _buy_ a completely new desktop hardware (ie. mac mini) to _run_ a simple request/response program? Excluding the fact that you can run LLMs via ollama or similar directly on the device, but that will not have a very good token/s speed as far as I can guess...
IMO the security pitchforking on OpenClaw is just so overdone. People without consideration for the implications will inevitably get burned, as we saw with the reddit posts "Agentic Coding tool X wiped my hard drive and apologized profusely". I work at a FAANG and every time you try something innovative the "policy people" will climb out of their holes and put random roadblocks in your way, not for the sake of actual…
then the heads changed and we were back to square one.
but for a moment it was glorious of what was possible.
IMO the security pitchforking on OpenClaw is just so overdone. People without consideration for the implications will inevitably get burned, as we saw with the reddit posts "Agentic Coding tool X wiped my hard drive and apologized profusely". I work at a FAANG and every time you try something innovative the "policy people" will climb out of their holes and put random roadblocks in your way, not for the sake of actual…
What a surprise that someone working in Big Tech would find "pesky" policies to get in their way. These companies have obviously done so much good for the world; imagine what they could do without any guardrails!
IMO the security pitchforking on OpenClaw is just so overdone. People without consideration for the implications will inevitably get burned, as we saw with the reddit posts "Agentic Coding tool X wiped my hard drive and apologized profusely". I work at a FAANG and every time you try something innovative the "policy people" will climb out of their holes and put random roadblocks in your way, not for the sake of actual…
> the "policy people" will climb out of their holes I am one of those people and I work at a FANG. And while I know it seems annoying, these teams are overwhelmed with not only innovators but lawyers asking so many variations of the same question it's pretty hard to get back to the innovators with a thumbs up or guidance. Also there is a real threat here. The "wiped my hard drive" story is annoying but it's a toy pro…
"unlock innovators" is a very mild example; perhaps you shouldn't be a jailor in your metaphors?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the "policy people" will climb out of their holes I am one of those people and I work at a FANG. And while I know it seems annoying, these teams are overwhelmed with not only innovators but lawyers asking so many variations of the same question it's pretty hard to get back to the innovators with a thumbs up or guidance. Also there is a real threat here. The "wiped my hard drive" story is annoying but it's a toy pro…
I am sure there are many good corporate security policy people doing important work. But then there are people like this; I get handed an application developed by my company for use by partner companies. It's a java application, shipped as a jar, nothing special. It gets signed by our company, but anybody with the wherewithal can pull the jar apart and mod the application however they wish. One of the partner compani…
You seem to blame the person who is trying to save the company from security issues, rather than placing the blame on your boss that made you do work that would never gotten approved in the first place if they just checked with the right person first?
IMO the security pitchforking on OpenClaw is just so overdone. People without consideration for the implications will inevitably get burned, as we saw with the reddit posts "Agentic Coding tool X wiped my hard drive and apologized profusely". I work at a FAANG and every time you try something innovative the "policy people" will climb out of their holes and put random roadblocks in your way, not for the sake of actual…
1. The compliance box tickers and bean counters are in the way of innovation and it hurts companies.
2. Claws derive their usefulness mainly from having broad permissions, not only to you local system but also to your accounts via your real identity [1]. Carefulness is very much warranted.
[1] People correct me if I'm misguided, but that is how I see it. Run the bot in a sandbox with no data and a bunch of fake accounts and you'll see how useful that is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the "policy people" will climb out of their holes I am one of those people and I work at a FANG. And while I know it seems annoying, these teams are overwhelmed with not only innovators but lawyers asking so many variations of the same question it's pretty hard to get back to the innovators with a thumbs up or guidance. Also there is a real threat here. The "wiped my hard drive" story is annoying but it's a toy pro…
The main problem with many IT and security people at many tech companies is that they communicate in a way that betrays their belief that they are superior to their colleagues. "unlock innovators" is a very mild example; perhaps you shouldn't be a jailor in your metaphors?
I'm okay with the people in charge of building on top of my private information being jailed by very strict, mean sounding, actually-higher-than-you people whose only goal is protecting my information.
Quite frankly, if you changed any word of that, they'd probably be impotent and my data would be toast.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am sure there are many good corporate security policy people doing important work. But then there are people like this; I get handed an application developed by my company for use by partner companies. It's a java application, shipped as a jar, nothing special. It gets signed by our company, but anybody with the wherewithal can pull the jar apart and mod the application however they wish. One of the partner compani…
So why are these people not involved from the first place? Seems like a huge management/executive failure that the right people who needs to check off the design weren't involved until after developers implemented the feature. You seem to blame the person who is trying to save the company from security issues, rather than placing the blame on your boss that made you do work that would never gotten approved in the fir…
Yes, management was ultimately at fault. They're at fault for not tard wrangling the security guys into doing their jobs up front. They're also at fault for not tard wrangling the security guys when they object to an inherently modifiable application being modified.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A Mac allows it to send iMessage and access the Apple ecosystem.
Really? That's it?
First, a 16GB RPi that is in stock and you can actually buy seems to run about $220. Then you need a case, a power supply (they're sensitive, not any USB brick will do), an NVMe. By the time it's all said and done, you're looking at close to $400.
I know HN likes to quote the starting price for the 1GB model and assume that everyone has spare NVMe sticks and RPi cases lying around, but $400 is the realistic price for most users who want to run LLMs.
Second, most of the time you can find Minis on sale for $500 or less. So the price difference is less than $100 for something that comes working out of the box and you don't have to fuss with.
Then you have to consider the ecosystem:
* Accelerated PyTorch works out of the box by simply changing the device from 'cuda' to 'mps'. In the real world, an M5 mini will give you a decent fraction of V100 performance (For reference, M2 Max is about 1/3 the speed of a V100, real-world).
* For less technical users, Ollama just works. It has OpenAI and Anthropic APIs out of the box, so you can point ClaudeCode or OpenCode at it. All of this can be set up from the GUI.
* Apple does a shockingly good job of reducing power consumption, especially idle power consumption. It wouldn't surprise me if a Pi5 has 2x the idle draw of a Mini M5. That matters for a computer running 24/7.