Okay so I had to look in to it because the site is not really doing a good job explaining it at all. Turns out[0] that they are voting for the extension of the temporary regulation thats been in effect since 2021 (Regulation (EU) 2021/1232). So this is about the "voluntary scanning of private communications" (which is still bad, but has been in effect for almost 5 years already).
Yeah so this is about CC 1.0 (which already exists)
While it's still worth fighting, it is less worrying
The question of course is, why something is allowed multiple votes (and the basic answer is - if it presented some changed - but I don't know if it's the case)
This is the thing that bothers me the most about this. It is as if even the HN crowd is taking it as given that malware is this big problem for banking on Android but in reality there seems to be very little evidence to back this up. I regularly read local (Finnish) news stories about scams and they always seem to be about purely social engineering via whatsapp or the scammer calling their number and convincing the victim they are a banking official or police etc.
That's why I'm inclined to believe Google is just using safety as an excuse to further leverage their monopoly.
Chrome ships a local OCR model for text extraction from PDFs which is better than any of the VLM or open source OCR models i've tried. I had a few hundred gigs of old newspaper scans and after trying all the other options I ended up building a wrapper around the DLL it uses to get the text and bboxes. Performance and accuracy on another level compared to tesseract, and while VLM models sometimes produced good results they just seemed unreliable.
I've thought of open sourcing the wrapper but havent gotten around to it yet. I bet claude code can build a functioning prototype if you just point it to "screen_ai" dir under chrome's user data.
Is there a chance you'll open source the wrapper after all? It would help a lot of people like me. No pressure though, but now I really want to try it to OCR a bunch of Japanese scans I have lying around. Unfortunately, finding a good OCR for Japanese scans is still a huge problem in 2026.
It is CPU-based. Somewhere between 1 to 2 seconds per page on a single core. I ran 20 instances of it in parallel to utilize 20 CPU cores so the avg time came down nicely.
That's actually amazing, and might give me a way to use all the cores I have lying around. 2s per page is an insane 600 pages per minute at 20 cores!
Please do open source it, even if you don't do much around it (worst case I can just spend a few million tokens trying to get opus 4.6 to get it to work)
chrome_screen_ai.dll is the name of the dll (libchromescreenai.so on linux) and yes it is proprietary. It isn't included by default, Chrome uses its component service to download it automatically when you open a PDF file that doesn't have pre-existing OCR'd text on it. You can download it separately from here: https://chrome-infra-packages.appspot.com/p/chromium/third_p...
I would assume so. I can see from my browser history that i succesfully submitted captures to archive.today on 7th of January, but failed to do so starting from 12th of January. IIRC they contacted gyrovague around the 10th so seems unlikely to be a coincidence. Applies to VPNs as well. Tried first with a VPN located in Finland and it gets endless captcha loop, then with a Swedish VPN which let me through to the front page after solving one captcha.
The system prompt of claude code changes constantly. I use this site to see what has changed between versions: https://cchistory.mariozechner.at/
It is a bit weird why anthropic doesn't make that available more openly. Depending on your preferences there is stuff in the default system prompt that you may want to change.
I personally have a list of phrases that I patch out from the system prompt after each update by running sed on cc's main.js
I took the time to read that document a while back and it almost certainly isn't the correct guy. At the very least it provides 0 evidence other than concluding that "he must be the guy" due to his name, country of origin and programming background.
Yeah I just read through it and it presents absolutely no useful evidence. They establish that there's a developer in the US called Denis Petrov. They establish that someone involved with archive.today is often referred to as Denis Petrov. Then they make some weird leaps to conclude that they must be the same person.
A quick web search suggests Denis Petrov is not at all a unique name. Just because on of them wrote a somewhat feminist thought on a blog in 2004 and another forked a... let's call it "satirically feminist" project on GitHub does not in any way suggest they are the same person.
I’m not certain either way, but part of the document tries to make a big deal about some GitHub profiles having the “arctic code vault archive” badge, and implying that has something to do with running an archive website.
Pretty much anyone who has made any kind of commit to an open source project has that badge.
read the same PDF a year or so back when someone spammed it across the archive.is blog, laughed when i got to that bit - it's pretty clear the person writing it doesn't know anything about development
edit: it's incredibly naive of them to immediately trust the WHOIS results. i can say from experience that these are never checked
reply