the 70/30 principle: AI handles 70% of execution, the human provides the 30% that matters.

Never mentioned authentication

readable AND writable by anyone on Earth for 11 days

Shouldn’t you have had a human check that before going live, given the 70/30 principle?

Full writeup with forensic details, the remediation comedy, and the 70/30 framework: mpdc.dev/the-locksmiths-apprentice I document everything — wins and losses — because someone building their first self-hosted stack shouldn’t have to learn this the hard way.

I don’t think they should learn from you, either, to be fair.

The fisherman is being fished by someone above the panel and the bait is the iPhone.

I’m confused what your issue is with the dev. He seems to have posted because uBO was breaking the site for premium users and then got told “just stop monetizing effectively.” Only one reply (don’t use such an obnoxious way to insert the ad sidebar) was actually helpful, though it was at odds with part of his monetization strategy (pay for Premium to get that extra space).

If uBO devs had said “Sure, give this account premium access and we’ll check it out” and he’d refused, that would be different, but instead they said there was nothing he could do to help them and banned him from participating.

It also doesn’t seem that he’s intentionally breaking the app when uBO is in use. Rather, uBO breaks the app when ads aren’t being served and he is now detecting when this happens and serving a message about the fact.

Does anyone know of similar image editors out there that can batch-crop images in a certain aspect ratio/resolution and then export them to webp?

Not similar, but Image Magick can crop images from the cli and has webp support.

I think that makes you “the guy who really likes to talk about Linux.”

While police may resent offensive words, they cannot use their authority to punish individuals for lawful, protected conduct.

Factually incorrect.

First, consider that regardless of whether they are prohibited from arresting people for insulting them, they do. Those charges are often dropped or thrown out, sure - albeit with no consequences for the police officer - but I would consider having to deal with that hassle “punishment” that they can inflict purely because of their authority.

But there’s also institutional support for an officer to punish you for lawful, protected conduct. If you upset an officer and in response, he cites or arrests you for a minor but legitimate offense that he’d have otherwise not cared about, you’re very unlikely to get that technically legitimate charge thrown out of court. It may be that police are technically prohibited from doing this, but in practice, “He only arrested me for — insert random crime here, let’s say jaywalking — because I called him a pig, said I’d engaged in coitus with his mother the previous night, and asked if he’d like to watch next time or if he had a night in with his partner’s nightstick planned” isn’t going to suffice to get the charge thrown out, even if the judge believes you, if you were actually breaking the law in question. And since pretty much everyone is breaking laws all the time, this means that as long as the police officer can find one that you’re currently breaking, you’re fucked.

From the blog post referenced:

We do not provide evidence that:

AI systems do not currently speed up many or most software developers

Seems the article should be titled “16 AI coders think they’re 20% faster — but they’re actually 19% slower” - though I guess making us think it was intended to be a statistically relevant finding was the point.

That all said, this was genuinely interesting and is in-line with my understanding of the human psychology that’s at play. It would be nice to see this at a wider scale, broken down across different methodologies / toolsets and models.

A paid skillful engineer, who doesn’t think it’s important to make that sort of a change and who knows how the system works, will know that, if success is judged solely by “does it work?” then the effort is doomed for failure. Such an engineer will push to have the requirements written clearly and explicitly - “how does it function?” rather than “what are the results?” - which means that unless the person writing the requirements actually understands the solution, said solution will end up having its requirements written such that even if it’s defeated instantly, it will count as a success. It met the specifications, after all.