Old bank notes are not in circulation forever. They are accounted for by serial numbers. Banks and ATMs can process the serials and designs and report them. Eventually bank notes get pulled out of circulation. So an old bank note is by default suspicious and gets checked more thoroughly. Counterfeiters mostly benefit by blending in with the masses, so having some old note can raise suspicion.
Every redesign introduces new (secret) watermarks, patterns that are hard to copy, so it's also a "tech" update. Eventually more and more of the details become public. By now the current banknotes are too well known and I guess the counterfeits are getting too close.
All this felt heavy to me. Full browser, debug protocol, DOM dump on every read. MCP vs CLI is the smaller question, what sits underneath matters more. So I built a small Rust binary that drives the system webview directly and returns state tokens and deltas instead of the DOM. Loading the HN front page costs the agent about 50 tokens. It speaks both MCP and CLI, pick whichever your agent prefers.
...the influx of contributions authored or submitted by AI is sapping the projects' maintainers of their willingness to confront the "already tedious" work of reviewing pull requests....
To me this seems a core issue: PR reviews for most people feel tedious and this has been the case way before AI already.
Don't get me wrong, slop is slop, no matter if AI or entirely human-fabricated. But just like AI-assisted coding can actually be helpful, why can't AI-assisted PR reviews make it less tedious?
In my recent quest to build agent-as-primary-user tools I've built grpvn (https://github.com/frane/grpvn), a small Go/SQLite application that lets skill- and mcp-capable agents talk to each other. Biggest issue is the lack of a hook system so the agents can autonomously read and respond. Waiting for this to be supported, as IMO multi-agent teams talking to each other are an interesting next step.
I feel the same and don’t get the extreme AI is inherently evil vs. AI is the best thing ever invented discussions. For me it’s all just emacs vs vi or tabs vs spaces kind of discussions.
It’s a tool and the good old sh* in sh* out principle applies.
People might take Mitchell’s comment as some kind of anti-AI stance, but it’s not he uses it regularly and makes a point in the X comments: “use AI, but think”
That comment sums it up best, because right now it’s hard to talk to either side, which separates at the comma.
Just feels like they are a bit late to the CLI coding agent party. So why not get in with a bang and open up to a broader audience?
All other agents have a lower barrier to try and play around.
Curious too about open sourcing. But they seem to be doing -p mode and ACP right already. Anthropic is opening a lot of opportunities for competitors right now
OpenAI was dreaming of some billions from this partnership that didn’t happen.
Assuming there is a contract with rights, obligations and responsibilities both parties signed, I can’t imagine a company like Apple exposing itself by not honoring their part.
So sue for what? “We dreamt of more and it didn’t happen”?
Maybe it is also just fun...