MiMo Code is now released and open-source • Hacker News Board

Re: MiMo Code is now released and open-source

#321

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jun 12, 2026, 5:34 PM UTC

ecshafer wrote: post #319

feoren wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am the furthest thing from an Anarchist I know this is beside the point but I'm quite amused by this statement. Are you saying you're a totalitarian? I'm not trying to poke at you here; I'm genuinely interested what you consider the furthest thing from an anarchist to be?

From an Anarchist perspective isn't any state necessarily totalitarian? But I do believe there aught to be a strong, patriarchal, centralized state with strict laws and severe punishments. I think Singapore is close to an ideal.

[deleted]

Re: MiMo Code is now released and open-source

#322

Post by bigyabai » Fri, Jun 12, 2026, 7:33 PM UTC

bmacho wrote: post #298

bigyabai wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

X11 and sysvinit are not downstream KParts libs like KHTML was. KDE has no obligation to fork or support either project.

KDE is not a fork, nevertheless KDE was building on X11 heavily and now they are trying to kill it. So while technically not the same story as if it was a direct fork of X11, practically they have the 'obligation' to support X11 indefinitely. KDE trying to kill X11 too is the same exact EEE that you mentioned as a sad story in regads of KHTML.

KDE is not obliged to support X11 any more than they're obliged to support JACK1 or sysvinit. They're all in maintenance mode, KDE couldn't embrace or extend them even if they wanted to.

KHTML is tragic because it had willing developers working for the public good. Jack1 and X11 are not tragic, because their developers were already drafting transition plans to depreciate their libraries.

Re: MiMo Code is now released and open-source

#323

Post by jnovek » Fri, Jun 12, 2026, 9:04 PM UTC

sroussey wrote: post #268

jnovek wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why would a company do any of these things? What? It’s actually insane that they haven’t yet. I don’t like changing tools. What engineer does? I want to learn one tool and tune it to my exact preferences. Proprietary vendor tools are not portable and I avoid them. Either Anthropic or OpenAI could drop the first-to-market open coding harness tomorrow and it would be as big as VSCode, it would be the standard platfor…

MS releasing VS code led to Cursor reaping $60B in value.

What do you mean by $60b in value? Revenue? Valuation? Cursor’s most recent raise was at a post valuation of $29b.

Also, leadership at MSFT has talked quite a bit about their strategy with VS Code and it’s exactly what I was describing above (which is why I used it as an example). They give it away for free so that they can control the ecosystem.

Re: MiMo Code is now released and open-source

#324

Post by sroussey » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 3:47 AM UTC

jnovek wrote: post #323

sroussey wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MS releasing VS code led to Cursor reaping $60B in value.

What do you mean by $60b in value? Revenue? Valuation? Cursor’s most recent raise was at a post valuation of $29b. Also, leadership at MSFT has talked quite a bit about their strategy with VS Code and it’s exactly what I was describing above (which is why I used it as an example). They give it away for free so that they can control the ecosystem.

SpaceX is buying it for $60B

Re: MiMo Code is now released and open-source

#325

Post by devmor » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 4:09 AM UTC

sumedh wrote: post #295

devmor wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public good isn’t a charity, and a business model that doesn’t contribute to the public good should not be allowed to exist.

Who defines what is public good?

Well, the public. It’s in the name.

Re: MiMo Code is now released and open-source

#326

Post by fnordpiglet » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 5:30 AM UTC

vidarh wrote: post #283

fnordpiglet wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cloud providers are commodity, and egress pricing is partially cost following because they have to pay peering to their interconnect points for WAN. Internal networks are not charged within the account because the economics of the VPC overlay are optimized for that use, but inter account and VPC and other boundaries carry cost - especially interconnection between accounts because the way VPC treats virtualization req…

At least AWS egress pricing is a very high multiple of market rate.

I will say they do negotiate it if it’s excessive. I have negotiated flat rates on both public and DC egress due to scale and architecture and they were open to it.

Re: MiMo Code is now released and open-source

#327

Post by poeticfumes » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 6:58 AM UTC

Not bad at all

Re: MiMo Code is now released and open-source

#328

Post by digitaltrees » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 5:48 PM UTC

thefounder wrote: post #289

digitaltrees wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is giving away AI for free so it’s harder to make money. The same strategy they did with solar panels. Sell them at a loss long enough until the manufacturers go out of business and you’re the only one surviving. Then flip to extract monopoly profits

What does it sound so familiar with some US business models? I mean all the big tech does exactly that plus Uber (if you call it a tech company)

Yes, and this used to be illegal anticompetitive behavior until Reagan eliminated a ton of antitrust laws. So I don’t think saying “but uber and google and Microsoft do it so it’s ok” is persuasive. Free markets require competition so regulation that ensures competition is essential for the free market to function. Free trade requires the same function. We lack both and are seeing the effects of monopolies and anticompetitive behavior.

Re: MiMo Code is now released and open-source

#329

Post by digitaltrees » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 5:50 PM UTC

bigbadfeline wrote: post #256

digitaltrees wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is giving away AI for free so it’s harder to make money. The same strategy they did with solar panels. Sell them at a loss long enough until the manufacturers go out of business and you’re the only one surviving. Then flip to extract monopoly profits

> China is giving away AI for free so it’s harder to make money. That might've crossed their minds but that wouldn't move their hand, not even a finger. Politics is the primary driver here, here's the deal: AI is the new Internet China foresaw a world where they'd be blocked from it and Anthropic's ongoing attempt to block their own country form it shows how right the Chinese were.

I don’t see the connection. If they want access they would prioritize building their own clones. They wouldn’t try to destroy the thing they are cloning. They would want to continue to ride the coat tails of innovation as long as possible. The move to undermine competition shows an attempt to win a race not preserve access.

Re: MiMo Code is now released and open-source

#330

Post by digitaltrees » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 5:52 PM UTC

randbyte wrote: post #266

digitaltrees wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is giving away AI for free so it’s harder to make money. The same strategy they did with solar panels. Sell them at a loss long enough until the manufacturers go out of business and you’re the only one surviving. Then flip to extract monopoly profits

Instead we got home solar system become very affordable over the past decade. And driving out US manufacturers isn’t even the main goal for China. They know their huge risk on reliance on petroleum and was doing everything they can to mitigate that. Building out a huge solar manufacturing base is their answer. Now they are reducing petro imports YoY.

But the US was a leader in manufacturing solar panels and could have facilitated the same price decline trajectory. Selling a product in a market below manufacturing cost specifically to bankrupt domestic manufacturers is an illegal trade practice under the WTO called dumping.