Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | WalterGR's commentslogin

> Were decomps/recomps a hobby because people wanted to make sure their old games could run on modern hardware and be extended with mods etc., or were they a hobby because people enjoyed the actual process of using Ghidra and reverse engineering by hand, and the decompiled game was just a side effect?

It’s interesting to dwell on what ‘we’ appreciated before versus what we appreciate now. Since LLMs lowered the bar, it feels like raw human effort has come to be held in higher esteem.

Are we going to re-evaluate what we were impressed with in the past based on that new metric? For example, will accomplishments by experienced engineers be devalued in comparison to accomplishments by outsiders? Will the software engineering equivalent of ‘folk’ or ‘outsider’ art become more valued? There will be a natural instinct to distrust outsider contributions because, well, how did they get so good?

Are some metrics of human effort going to be de rigueur going forward?


Study former examples of 'AI' doing this : the Luddites and various artisans displaced by 'AI' looms and 'AI' factories in the 19th century.

I was curious so I looked up that quote. It’s from here: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/10/04/the-world-ca...

“The world cannot afford an AI bubble right now” by Andrew Orlowski.

I didn’t find a corresponding HN submission but Algolia seems to be janky in lo these heady days.


> I get these all the time

What are the agents trying to do?


1. Submits bizarre information into Contact Us forms, complete with a working emails

2. Creates customer accounts and tries to use the various features (open support ticket, etc.)

3. The tickets will be about something that didn’t happen such as an outage that didn’t occur.

4. Load the status page and then immediately open tickets when a service goes down.

5. Submit pre-sales inquiries that are typical LLM slop.

6. Passes any captcha, passes SMS 2FA or email validation, etc. so it seemingly looks like a valid account.


I wonder what the motivation is for these?

(4) could be a precursor to a sales pitch for a paid service and (6) obviously has malevolent purposes. But the rest... just people testing agents? Causing mischief?


15 comments here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49961538

Mostly about the claim and not the (purported?) author.


That's for a separate problem, in case anyone gets confused.


There’s an interesting comment thread (including potential downsides) about this technique in the submission for “How to speed up the Rust compiler in September 2026” from a couple days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49923594

The commenter there is the OP, for what it's worth

Additional information about potential downsides and prior art (including links to the previous time that this was attempted, in a slightly different form): https://github.com/PowderworksCode/headstart/blob/main/docs/...

That would be quite shocking. Links?

Old article: https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-hig...

Fast forward to today: getting access to the canbus (e.g. via headlights) allow you to steal the car: https://www.theregister.com/security/2023/04/06/how-thieves-...

Given the integration of these modules, is it that weird that you could send signals the other way?


> Given the integration of these modules, is it that weird that you could send signals the other way?

No, but there are simple solutions to this: a firewall, which is how this has been fixed on some cars.


You trust car makers to get that right?

You trust state actors to not force them to not get it right?


I don't trust any of them -- I simply commented on the fact that it is a solvable problem.


>Cybersecurity experts hack and take remote control of SUV (2015)

https://youtu.be/DoP71LeQt3o?si=eSWRTaBYmzAOPWEz


Shocking?

Why would it be shocking?

It would be shocking if it weren't possible. Being a car does not confer any sort of magical protection against hacking because "it's just a car" or something.


Related: “NTSB issues investigative update on B-767 runway excursion accident in Miami” (ntsb.gov)

150 points | 22 days ago | 292 comments

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49650418


OP: Your article shows “[Contents]” where presumably the table of contents is to be displayed.

It's a button

So it is. If it looked like the links and not normal text, that would be more clear.

Thanks for the feedback, it should be better now.

263 comments, posted 6 hours ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49926069

Consider applying for YC's Winter 2027 batch! Applications are open till November 2.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: