Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kimi Work

kimi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 305 posts

Re: Kimi Work

#31

Post by postalcoder »

gruez wrote: post #29
postalcoder wrote: post #25

kimi has been particularly shameless in copying codex 1:1, wow. Like, I get it, before condex there was conductor and a ton of other guis but this looks like they just copied the code. Also, their privacy disclosure is incredibly misleading: > How does Kimi Work protect my privacy when accessing local files? You have absolute control over your files. The built-in Ask before acting safeguard means Kimi will prompt you…

>They fail to mention that is has unfettered read access to your files. Isn't that totally expected of a coding agent? Otherwise it's like complaining dropbox "has unfettered access to your files".

Yes, but the answer is an indirection.

“How does Kimi Work protect my privacy when accessing local files?”

It doesn’t protect your privacy. It’s like asking, “how do I know you’re not spying on me?” And getting the reply “we cannot physically enter your house.”

Re: Kimi Work

#32

Post by questionableans »

gruez wrote: post #29
postalcoder wrote: post #25

kimi has been particularly shameless in copying codex 1:1, wow. Like, I get it, before condex there was conductor and a ton of other guis but this looks like they just copied the code. Also, their privacy disclosure is incredibly misleading: > How does Kimi Work protect my privacy when accessing local files? You have absolute control over your files. The built-in Ask before acting safeguard means Kimi will prompt you…

>They fail to mention that is has unfettered read access to your files. Isn't that totally expected of a coding agent? Otherwise it's like complaining dropbox "has unfettered access to your files".

The repo you’re working on, sure. But all files?

Re: Kimi Work

#33

Post by [deleted] »

questionableans wrote: post #32
gruez wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They fail to mention that is has unfettered read access to your files. Isn't that totally expected of a coding agent? Otherwise it's like complaining dropbox "has unfettered access to your files".

The repo you’re working on, sure. But all files?

[deleted]

Re: Kimi Work

#34

Post by digitaltrees »

postalcoder wrote: post #25

kimi has been particularly shameless in copying codex 1:1, wow. Like, I get it, before condex there was conductor and a ton of other guis but this looks like they just copied the code. Also, their privacy disclosure is incredibly misleading: > How does Kimi Work protect my privacy when accessing local files? You have absolute control over your files. The built-in Ask before acting safeguard means Kimi will prompt you…

I am more concerned about what happens to the file if I give permission.

Opensource and local are seeming like the only way.

Re: Kimi Work

#35

Post by cyanydeez »

postalcoder wrote: post #25

kimi has been particularly shameless in copying codex 1:1, wow. Like, I get it, before condex there was conductor and a ton of other guis but this looks like they just copied the code. Also, their privacy disclosure is incredibly misleading: > How does Kimi Work protect my privacy when accessing local files? You have absolute control over your files. The built-in Ask before acting safeguard means Kimi will prompt you…

if your model ever touches bash, it has unfettered acess to all your files.

Re: Kimi Work

#36

Post by victorbjorklund »

dyauspitr wrote: post #30
postalcoder wrote: post #25

kimi has been particularly shameless in copying codex 1:1, wow. Like, I get it, before condex there was conductor and a ton of other guis but this looks like they just copied the code. Also, their privacy disclosure is incredibly misleading: > How does Kimi Work protect my privacy when accessing local files? You have absolute control over your files. The built-in Ask before acting safeguard means Kimi will prompt you…

[flagged]

As if American companies don’t copy each other or copy what Chinese firms does.

Re: Kimi Work

#37

Post by austinthetaco »

victorbjorklund wrote: post #36
dyauspitr wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

As if American companies don’t copy each other or copy what Chinese firms does.

there is a pretty stark difference between independent US companies copying each other and a state backed chinese company taking data and IP from american citizens.

Re: Kimi Work

#38

Post by codemog »

postalcoder wrote: post #25

kimi has been particularly shameless in copying codex 1:1, wow. Like, I get it, before condex there was conductor and a ton of other guis but this looks like they just copied the code. Also, their privacy disclosure is incredibly misleading: > How does Kimi Work protect my privacy when accessing local files? You have absolute control over your files. The built-in Ask before acting safeguard means Kimi will prompt you…

How dare they copy the largest plagiarism machine ever created.

Re: Kimi Work

#39

Post by supriyo-biswas »

postalcoder wrote: post #25

kimi has been particularly shameless in copying codex 1:1, wow. Like, I get it, before condex there was conductor and a ton of other guis but this looks like they just copied the code. Also, their privacy disclosure is incredibly misleading: > How does Kimi Work protect my privacy when accessing local files? You have absolute control over your files. The built-in Ask before acting safeguard means Kimi will prompt you…

Everyone’s saying that it looks like Codex but TBH it just looks like all the AI chat websites on the side and some frequent actions on the top.

Re: Kimi Work

#40

Post by airstrike »

datakan wrote: post #20
airstrike wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's precisely the problem. People are building UI/UX for a paradigm that is so utterly new that they miss the mark entirely. Everyone defaults to a big chat input because that's all they know. It's the expectation, so it's safer, faster, and cheaper to not deviate. It's also wrong and bad for work.

> It's also wrong and bad for work. Say's who? Why? I honestly don't get the problem. OpenAI just did what you said with the Mac app and were forced to roll it back because of the uproar. A chat box is simple, relatable, easy to use. K.I.S.S. is a thing

> Says who.

Says everyone who's not using this stuff. It's an empirical argument. Is anyone actually using this for work? How long has it been since Cowork was released?

It's such an inadequate tool for work it reeks of SF hubris to think you can just slap a chat input box onto a PC and replace 90% of white collar jobs.

Post reply on HN