41–50 of 128 posts
Every time I see something about trying to control an LLM by sending instructions to the LLM, I wonder: have we really learned nothing of the pitfalls of in-band signaling since the days of phreaking?
Sure but the exploit here isn’t prompt injection, it is an edge case in their billing that isn’t attributing agent calls correctly.
(Source: submitted similar issue to different Agentic LLM provider)
Even without hacks, Copilot is still a cheap way to use Claude models: - $10/month - Copilot CLI for Claude Code type CLI, VS Code for GUI - 300 requests (prompts) on Sonnet 4.5, 100 on Opus 4.6 (3x) - One prompt only ever consumes one request, regardless of tokens used - Agents auto plan tasks and create PRs - "New Agent" in VS Code runs agent locally - "New Cloud Agent" runs agent in the cloud ( https://github.com/…
Even without hacks, Copilot is still a cheap way to use Claude models: - $10/month - Copilot CLI for Claude Code type CLI, VS Code for GUI - 300 requests (prompts) on Sonnet 4.5, 100 on Opus 4.6 (3x) - One prompt only ever consumes one request, regardless of tokens used - Agents auto plan tasks and create PRs - "New Agent" in VS Code runs agent locally - "New Cloud Agent" runs agent in the cloud ( https://github.com/…
+1. I see all these posts about tokens, and I'm like "who's paying by the token?"
When you use the API
Is it just me or is Microsoft really phoning it in recently?
Microsoft notoriously tolerated pirated Windows and Office installations for about a decade and a half, to solidify their usage as de facto standard and expected. Tolerating unofficial free usage of their latest products is standard procedure for MS.
The laat comment is a person pretending to be a maintainer of Microsoft. I have a gut feeling that these kind of people will only increase, and we'll have vibe engineers scouring popular repositories to ""contribute"" (note that the suggested fix is vague). I completely understand why some projects are in whitelist-contributors-only mode. It's becoming a mess.
As someone who takes pride in being thorough and detail oriented, I cannot stand when people provide the bare minimum of effort in response. Earlier this week I created a bug report for an internal software project on another team. It was a bizarre behavior, so out of curiosity and a desire to be truly helpful, I spent a couple hours whittling the issue down to a small, reproducible test case. I even had someone on my team run through the reproduction steps to confirm it was reproducible on at least one other environment.
The next day, the PM of the other team responded with a _screenshot of an AI conversation_ saying the issue was on my end for misusing a standard CLI tool. I was offended on so many levels. For one, I wasn’t using the CLI tool in the way it describes, and even if I was it wouldn’t affect the bug. But the bigger problem is that this person thinks a screenshot of an AI conversation is an acceptable response. Is this what talking to semi technical roles is going to be like from now on? I get to argue with an LLM by proxy of another human? Fuck that.
The laat comment is a person pretending to be a maintainer of Microsoft. I have a gut feeling that these kind of people will only increase, and we'll have vibe engineers scouring popular repositories to ""contribute"" (note that the suggested fix is vague). I completely understand why some projects are in whitelist-contributors-only mode. It's becoming a mess.
Is it just me or is Microsoft really phoning it in recently?
Is it just me or is Microsoft really phoning it in recently?
Recently? They've been shipping absolute trash for 15 years, and still haven't reached the bottom apparently.
I do think some things in Microsoft ecosystem are salvageable, they just aren't trendy. The Windows kernel can still work, .Net and their C++ runtime, Win32 / Winforms, ActiveDirectory, Exchange (on-prem) and Office are all still fixable and will last Microsoft a long time. It's just boring, and Microsoft apparently won't do it, because: No subscription.