Flock Condemns False Child Predator Allegations, Yet Calls Critics Terrorists
31 by jhonovich | 10 comments on Hacker News.
Saturday, 18 April 2026
New top story on Hacker News: Claude Code Opus 4.7 keeps checking on malware
Claude Code Opus 4.7 keeps checking on malware
3 by decide1000 | 0 comments on Hacker News.
So during development, at every task I start, I see a line like this: `Own bug file — not malware.` It seems that it's obsessively checking if it's working on malware production. In another situation where I was working on a parser of a HTML document with JS, it refused because it believed that I was bypassing security measurements. I believe AI has to be supportive in the work that I'm doing. When it's obsessively checking me if I am doing anything wrong or abusing the system, I have the feeling it is controlling me. I understand that we do have guardrails and I also understand that it's very important that people do not abuse this new tech for bad stuff. I pay $200 per month for a max subscription. They already know who I am. Claude knows I work in scraper tech, and it also knows that our clients are the companies we scrape. Now with Opus 4.7, I've had a situation that it refused to continue because I asked to automate the cookie creation with a Chrome extension. In a situation where someone is abusing the system, let's say create malware or hacking stuff with bad intentions. I can imagine there will be some signal system or algorithm that can form an opinion about the intentions that someone has. But now that the AI is limiting me in my work, I feel a little bit disrupted. Who the hell does this system think he is to limit me? Am I going to accept this in the future? That a system will tell me that I cannot continue because I don't have sufficient rights or beliefs that I'm doing anything wrong. I can work fine on the local AI on my Blackwell GPU. But of course, I want to use the latest tech, the latest AI and the best models available. Is this the beginning of a split? Where good people and naughty people make different choices? Am I the bad guy now? Last year I passed 40. I grew up reading, talking about Kevin Mitnick. I was a member of a local computer club. Hacking stuff as a 14-year-old kid who did not have intentions to break anything but to outsmart systems. Is that area gone now? Is the newer generation going to accept that they have to please the AI?
3 by decide1000 | 0 comments on Hacker News.
So during development, at every task I start, I see a line like this: `Own bug file — not malware.` It seems that it's obsessively checking if it's working on malware production. In another situation where I was working on a parser of a HTML document with JS, it refused because it believed that I was bypassing security measurements. I believe AI has to be supportive in the work that I'm doing. When it's obsessively checking me if I am doing anything wrong or abusing the system, I have the feeling it is controlling me. I understand that we do have guardrails and I also understand that it's very important that people do not abuse this new tech for bad stuff. I pay $200 per month for a max subscription. They already know who I am. Claude knows I work in scraper tech, and it also knows that our clients are the companies we scrape. Now with Opus 4.7, I've had a situation that it refused to continue because I asked to automate the cookie creation with a Chrome extension. In a situation where someone is abusing the system, let's say create malware or hacking stuff with bad intentions. I can imagine there will be some signal system or algorithm that can form an opinion about the intentions that someone has. But now that the AI is limiting me in my work, I feel a little bit disrupted. Who the hell does this system think he is to limit me? Am I going to accept this in the future? That a system will tell me that I cannot continue because I don't have sufficient rights or beliefs that I'm doing anything wrong. I can work fine on the local AI on my Blackwell GPU. But of course, I want to use the latest tech, the latest AI and the best models available. Is this the beginning of a split? Where good people and naughty people make different choices? Am I the bad guy now? Last year I passed 40. I grew up reading, talking about Kevin Mitnick. I was a member of a local computer club. Hacking stuff as a 14-year-old kid who did not have intentions to break anything but to outsmart systems. Is that area gone now? Is the newer generation going to accept that they have to please the AI?
Friday, 17 April 2026
New top story on Hacker News: Show HN: Stage – Putting humans back in control of code review
Show HN: Stage – Putting humans back in control of code review
24 by cpan22 | 15 comments on Hacker News.
Hey HN! We're Charles and Dean, and we're building Stage: a code review tool that guides you through reading a PR step by step, instead of piecing together a giant diff. Here's a demo video: https://ift.tt/vFBrVhX . You can play around with some example PRs here: https://ift.tt/ustyfEz . Teams are moving faster than ever with AI these days, but more and more engineers are merging changes that they don't really understand. The bottleneck isn't writing code anymore, it's reviewing it. We're two engineers who got frustrated with GitHub's UI for code review. As coding agents took off, we saw our PR backlog pile up faster than we could handle. Not only that, the PRs themselves were getting larger and harder to understand, and we found ourselves spending most of our time trying to build a mental model of what a PR was actually doing. We built Stage to make reviewing a PR feel more like reading chapters of a book, not an unorganized set of paragraphs. We use it every day now, not just to review each other's code but also our own, and at this point we can't really imagine going back to the old GitHub UI. What Stage does: when a PR is opened, Stage groups the changes into small, logical "chapters". These chapters get ordered in the way that makes most sense to read. For each chapter, Stage tells you what changed and specific things to double check. Once you review all the chapters, you're done reviewing the PR. You can sign in to Stage with your GitHub account and everything is synced seamlessly (commenting, approving etc.) so it fits into the workflows you're already used to. What we're not building: a code review bot like CodeRabbit or Greptile. These tools are great for catching bugs (and we use them ourselves!) but at the end of the day humans are responsible for what gets shipped. It's clear that reviewing code hasn't scaled the same way that writing did, and they (we!) need better tooling to keep up with the onslaught of AI generated code, which is only going to grow. We've had a lot of fun building this and are excited to take it further. If you're like us and are also tired of using GitHub for reviewing PRs, we'd love for you to try it out and tell us what you think!
24 by cpan22 | 15 comments on Hacker News.
Hey HN! We're Charles and Dean, and we're building Stage: a code review tool that guides you through reading a PR step by step, instead of piecing together a giant diff. Here's a demo video: https://ift.tt/vFBrVhX . You can play around with some example PRs here: https://ift.tt/ustyfEz . Teams are moving faster than ever with AI these days, but more and more engineers are merging changes that they don't really understand. The bottleneck isn't writing code anymore, it's reviewing it. We're two engineers who got frustrated with GitHub's UI for code review. As coding agents took off, we saw our PR backlog pile up faster than we could handle. Not only that, the PRs themselves were getting larger and harder to understand, and we found ourselves spending most of our time trying to build a mental model of what a PR was actually doing. We built Stage to make reviewing a PR feel more like reading chapters of a book, not an unorganized set of paragraphs. We use it every day now, not just to review each other's code but also our own, and at this point we can't really imagine going back to the old GitHub UI. What Stage does: when a PR is opened, Stage groups the changes into small, logical "chapters". These chapters get ordered in the way that makes most sense to read. For each chapter, Stage tells you what changed and specific things to double check. Once you review all the chapters, you're done reviewing the PR. You can sign in to Stage with your GitHub account and everything is synced seamlessly (commenting, approving etc.) so it fits into the workflows you're already used to. What we're not building: a code review bot like CodeRabbit or Greptile. These tools are great for catching bugs (and we use them ourselves!) but at the end of the day humans are responsible for what gets shipped. It's clear that reviewing code hasn't scaled the same way that writing did, and they (we!) need better tooling to keep up with the onslaught of AI generated code, which is only going to grow. We've had a lot of fun building this and are excited to take it further. If you're like us and are also tired of using GitHub for reviewing PRs, we'd love for you to try it out and tell us what you think!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)