Would you please not cross into personal attacks on HN? It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. We've already had to ask you this, and we end up banning accounts that keep breaking the site guidelines this way.
I get (incorrectly) accused of writing undisclosed sponsored content pretty often, so I'm actually hoping that the visible sponsor banner will help people resist that temptation because they can see that the sponsorship is visible, not hidden.
That's actually a cleaner editorial standard than most publications follow. The major risk in tech journalism isn't disclosed sponsorships — it's the undisclosed access journalism where coverage tone shifts to maintain relationships. Visible banners beat invisible influence every time.
Why do people find the need to market as "free alternative to xyz" when its a basic utility? I take it as an instant signal that the dev is a copycat and mostly interested in getting stars and eyeballs rather than making a genuinely useful high quality product.
Really good to know Handy exists; it's the first I'm hearing about it. I use a speech-to-text app that I built for myself, and I know at least one co-worker pays $10 a month for (I think) Wispr. I think it's possible there was no intention to market, and the creator simply didn't know about Handy, just like me.
This is Yellow Pages type thinking in the age of the internet. No one is going to own an agentic layer (list any of the multitude of platforms already irrelevant like OpenAI Agent SDK, Google A2A) . No one is going to own a new app store (GPTs are already dead). No one is going to foundation models (FOSS models are extremely capable today). No one is going to own inference (Data centers will never be as cost effective as that old MacBook collecting dust that is plenty capable of running a 1B model that can compete with ChatGPT 3.5 and all the use cases that it already was good at like writing high school essays, recipes etc.) The only thing that is sticking is Markdown (SKILLS.md, AGENTS.md)
This is because the simple reality of this new technology is that this is not the local maxima. Any supposed wall you attempt to put up will fail - real estate website closes its API? Fine, a CUA+VLM will make it trivial to navigate/extract/use. We will finally get back to the right solution of protocols over platforms, file over app, local over cloud or you know the way things were when tech was good.
P.S: You should immediately call BS when you see outrageous and patently untrue claims like "Mac minis are sold out all over.." - I checked my Best Buy in the heart of SF and they have stock. Or "that its all over Reddit, HN" - the only thing that is all over Reddit is unanimous derision towards OpenClaw and its security nightmares.
Utterly hate the old world mentality in this post. Looked up the author and ofcourse, he's from VC.
Don't underestimate the capitalists. We've seen this many times in the past--most recently the commercialization of the Internet. Before that, phones, radio and television.
> terms of statistics. You might want to read something called gauge R&R
I think the first thing to focus on is the stats portion - do you have appropriate FAI/SPC/OQC with Cpk requirements defined? Gauge R&R plays a much smaller role, especially in something that is relative
Claude Code has over 5000 open issues. And this is after issues that are inactive for 60 days being auto closed. Such a policy is facetious to say the least. What is more perplexing is why they don't use Claude to triage the issues?
I think the idea is that nobody will be using CC in 5 years. If anthropic loses, nobody will use it. If anthropic wins, still nobody will use it! The value is in the model solving problems, and CC is just the hacky vessel for that, not the end goal. If they believe in themselves, polishing the product is a waste of time.
reply