I never found a comfortable way to ensure all of my accounts had more than one U2F key associated with them. I always wished there was a way to have 2 physical U2F keys, one on me, and by adding one to an account, both would work.
As is, I had to either:
- Keep both on me, and add both - I am at risk of losing both at the same time
- Keep one one me, one in a safe - I have to keep track of which device I've added to which service, and periodically take the backup one out of the safe and iterate through the "new" services
I was never satisfied with either approach, so I ended up with an OTP app with backups.
This is a spot where smaller orgs are getting a definite advantage (both cost and speed). If you're a company with 20 - 50 people, you can probably get away with Claude Teams instead of Claude Enterprise, and pay 10x less in ai costs.
> If you intend to use VulnHunter on Anthropic's first-party platforms (Claude API / Claude Code), we strongly recommend enrolling first via the verification portal.
Has anyone actually had success with this? I applied for my company several weeks ago, and never heard back.
I've been using it with hermes and some coding (with opencode), and I am getting a LOT more than one feature out of it, but the work is spread throughout the week.
Looks like I have access to gpt-5.6-terra and luna. How does one decide between gpt-5.5 and gpt-5.6-terra? Pricing is similar, but it's hard to tell if it's better..
I personally use opencode so I can swap between models and try different options. I'd say I prefer claude (fable and opus 4.8) so far, but curious to see where gpt 5.6 lands.
For personal stuff, I've been pretty happy with chatgpt's $20 plan. I believe it has considerably higher limits than claude's $20 plan, and it's enough for the personal stuff I play with (hermes, and some small coding stuff). Also allows me to keep up to date on openai models.
Agreed. To me this feels like the perfect solution for websites and ai crawlers. Instead of having crawlers paying proxy services and captcha solvers, they can pay the website itself. As a web scraper, I'd happily pay the website provider to get access if it meant easy access to the content. Heck, as a human, I'd pay to avoid the dumb captchas.
Android does this fairly well for me - it will list out the options as they are spoken, and you can click on them directly to type the number. I believe (but haven't seen this recently) it will pre-render the options before they are read if it has knowledge of that phone tree.
I feel like the general consensus on most of the recent layoffs were that they severance was pretty generous. If it seems to be working okay, why do we need to introduce additional inefficiencies to get something we already have?
Maybe, but I have heard the exact same experience from my Dad and others that have worked with unions. It unfortunately seems to attract people trying to take advantage of the system. Personally if I were offered similar jobs, one with a union, one without, I'd take the one without.
Gemini thinks my name is my brother in law's name, and despite explicitly telling it that's not my name + digging through the settings, it still amusingly calls me the wrong name.
Even in those cases I'd prefer to just be able to natively search the content that has been lazy loaded. I've run into more than one website where the search functionality they bound to control-f is horrible.
hn [at] tomdickman [dot] com
https://tomdickman.com