Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | reconnecting's commentslogin

A chat interface where you can try Apertus:

https://chat.publicai.co


You will need to register with an email and password though, i.e. your sessions will be recorded and identified.

Also even after you do that, and start a chat, you currently get:

  "JSON.parse: unexpected character at line 1 column 1 of the JSON data"
so it's not quite there yet.

> Not megabits. Not gigabits. Not fiber.

...

> Not BBSs. Not CD-ROM encyclopedias. Not isolated digital islands.

...

> Artists had websites. Musicians had websites. Game developers had websites.

...

> People want answers. People want connection. People want tools.

This is just impossible to read.


It’s not impossible to read, just… pointless.

tirreno — open-source security framework

https://www.tirreno.com


I have a theory that corporations make new UIs to entertain people through them. First, to create the feeling that something is happening, and second, to increase screen time.

Old interfaces were far more practical for getting work done, and therefore obviously boring.

For me, as someone who is supposed to use technology as a tool and not as a source of amusement, the new interfaces of the major OSes feel unacceptable. But the other billion people chatting and scrolling are the real consumers, not me — and as a result, we now have the interfaces we have.


That’s one reason corporations make new UIs, yes, but the other is users demanding them for the sake of novelty. Reddit (but not only) is filled with people with no design sense complaining about how something which works (because it was relentlessly iterated on) looks “stale” and “old”. They’re the same users who jump from app to app willy nilly just chasing novelty. Any turd, if hyped enough, is ailed as “the future”, “modern”, “innovative”, which is repeated drivel from what the corporations tell you when they introduce their next thing.


Not really a theory.

Software makers treat UIs the way auto makers treat paint and body styling.


GUI looks a but BeOS inspired, but somehow even cleaner.


Good catch, the yellow and blue colors are totally inspired by BeOS :D I'm even adjusting the default VGA palette to get the right tints in 16-color mode.


I think it's that yellow bar what it makes it look like BeOS. And maybe the right hand menu bar. But once you check a B/W version, it doesn't look like BeOS that much.


More like a Win 3.1 theme with BeOS colors and a NeXT desktop.


The transparent pixel is often missing and breaks tables. HTML tags must be written properly in CAPS `<FONT>`, not `<font>`.

It doesn't work properly in my Netscape Navigator.


Amazing how this time Apple found the `sweet spot` to release Siri AI when the letter combination A and I has fed up literally everyone.


Watching the keynote at our office on a big screen and everyone collectively sighing when they announced the name felt indicative haha.

I think it just feels uncreative? Siri as a brand has some value, but if you want it to feel like a watershed moment where old Siri is "behind us" finally, just give it a new name.


I don't think Apple has the option to rebrand Siri at this stage, assuming people actually call Siri by name. However, turning AI into 'Apple Intelligence' doesn't feel creative either.


> assuming people actually call Siri by name

This doesn't follow for me. They can trivially allow it to still respond to the old wakeword. They should absolutely change the name in the event they can finally make it useful, because "Siri" is (in my mind and many others') a synonym for "hapless idiot." "Thanks, Siri" has been uttered hundreds of time in my house and my car, and 100% of the time it's sarcastic.


Same thing in my head. I only see this going one way, which is tons of people hear that Siri “got better” after this update.

Many of those people will speak a language that’s not English, or live in the EU or China where it’ll still be “Siri”, not “Siri AI”.

“Do you have the new Siri?”

“Yeah I updated… but she still seems so dumb”

“Oh yeah… well that’s Siri for you I guess”

Horrifying for marketing folk, I would presume. You’re just setting people up to confirm that Siri is always useless and improvements are invisible.


we were doing the same thing and giggling a bit that it's basically "AI AI" now. realistically a lot of people thought of Siri as AI already.


Or just keep calling it Siri, and announce "hey look, Siri does some cool new things."

AI is a technology, not a product. Consumers don't care about technologies, they care about what the product does versus what they currently have.

I think Jobs was an asshole, but one good thing I can say about him is that he understood the difference between technology and products. Imagine if they had called it the "iPod HDD."


The ergonomics of “the new X” sort of fall apart when you’re releasing it in stages. (Not in EU/only in English) It spawns a lot of conversations like “do you have the new Siri? Uh… I think so? It’s still crap though.” You cart around this bad brand image because you pitch this big watershed moment and 2/3rds of people are still using the “wrong” Siri.

Siri and Voice Control were both usable during the same time and it feels like it could work here too.

Totally agree that AI is just an implementation detail though. IMO that new product name should NOT have “AI” in it at all.


It's going to be weird though when my phone has Siri AI and my Homepod has Siri... "please ask on your iPhone" edition. I also don't quite get the distinction of Siri as an app versus the Siri I yell at to make my TV do something.


Amazing how someone again finds a meaningless thing Apple does better than the rest then blows it out of proportions. Makes you wonder if they are on Apple's PR team.


So you noticed the five ecosystems being shown working together, not perfectly but better than everyone else.


It looks bad from every perspective. I've never seen two apple's in one URL for product category before. apple.com/apple-intelligence

To prove my point, I opened a random date on the Apple website matching today's date to compare. 16 years ago, June 8 (1) Apple released the iPhone 4. There's still no room for jokes about that release, and from this perspective, calling their AI 'Apple Intelligence' feels weak compared to what they used to deliver.

I agree that some years ago Apple was the strongest in marketing, their brand team had been setting the bar for tech, but I simply can't say that anymore.

1. https://web.archive.org/web/20100608073904/http://www.apple....


Apple notably threw shade at the existing AI implementations, with an emphasis on making Siri AI more human-focused.

The stock price definitely didn't like it though.


The stock market is notorious for dropping on almost any Apple conference or announcement.


I mean, seriously, AI = Apple Intelligence?

It's not even funny, it's not smart. It's like if they released MS Siri and said it's Mac System Siri.


> I mean, seriously, AI = Apple Intelligence?

For pedantry's sake, they were saying "AI = Apple Intelligence" last year as well, so it's not like they just pulled it out of their butts now that popular opinion has turned against AI.


Exactly, I thought one year was enough to prove that everyone reads those letters differently nowadays.


I feel like the hate came more from the "Available today for Developers and later in Beta" than anything


From website: Monochrome-Dedicated CMOS Image Sensor

To pursue the highest level of monochrome expression, a dedicated image sensor was developed. It does not use a color filter to acquire color information; instead, each pixel captures the brightness information of the subject and directly translates it into a monochrome image. This allows the sensor to receive more light information than a conventional color image sensor, resulting in sharper images with enhanced detail and improved sensitivity.


> we eventually start to colonize other planets.

Could you please clarify which ones? I'm planning my escape, but it seems that even lightspeed wouldn't be enough to colonize anything suitable.


Eh? If you go at light speed you can literally go everywhere in the universe subjectively instantly due to time dilation.


> If you go at light speed

I will certainly not. And even if I did — within any reachable radius there's nothing actually suitable, everything is 10+ ly away, but maybe I missed something.


If you did go at 99.999999% or whatever 10 light years away means basically no time for you. That's how time dilation works. Or, from your subjective experience, the faster you go, the shorter the distance. If you go REALLY fast, the distance shrinks to nothing. Those two perspectives are the same way to think about the same underlying time/distance transformation that happens.


If you were traveling very close to light speed, time dilation would mean your experience of time is slowed down, such that if you can go infinitely close to the speed of light, you can travel anywhere as quickly as you have the energy for. For an observer on Earth you'd still take however many lightyears away the location is.


Did you check IP addresses, are they all from AS32934?


Yes

57.141.0.42 - - [05/Jun/2026:19:50:19 +0000] "GET /mid/a017bc62-0982-42db-8403-241d69da8d0f@alexander-goetzenstein.my-fqdn.de HTTP/2.0" 303 0 "-" "meta-externalagent/1.1 (+https://developers.facebook.com/docs/sharing/webmasters/craw...)"

57.141.0.48 - - [05/Jun/2026:19:50:22 +0000] "GET /group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/a/a236f5a5-63a4-4982-8bb6-07ffc684201b@googlegroups.com HTTP/2.0" 200 34838 "-" "meta-externalagent/1.1 (+https://developers.facebook.com/docs/sharing/webmasters/craw...)"

57.141.0.55 - - [05/Jun/2026:19:50:23 +0000] "GET /group/alt.recovery.aa/a/ne6onq%24hpp%241@dont-email.me HTTP/2.0" 200 5606 "-" "meta-externalagent/1.1 (+https://developers.facebook.com/docs/sharing/webmasters/craw...)"

57.141.0.56 - - [05/Jun/2026:19:50:24 +0000] "GET /group/aioe.news.assistenza/a/qpukie%241i1g%241@neodome.net?view=headers HTTP/2.0" 200 17027 "-" "meta-externalagent/1.1 (+https://developers.facebook.com/docs/sharing/webmasters/craw...)"

57.141.0.36 - - [05/Jun/2026:19:50:29 +0000] "GET /group/alt.obituaries/a/uf8pej%241hqi1%241@news.xmission.com HTTP/2.0" 200 6123 "-" "meta-externalagent/1.1 (+https://developers.facebook.com/docs/sharing/webmasters/craw...)"

57.141.0.66 - - [05/Jun/2026:19:50:29 +0000] "GET /group/comp.theory/a/v3640k%24vg63%243@dont-email.me HTTP/2.0" 200 148720 "-" "meta-externalagent/1.1 (+https://developers.facebook.com/docs/sharing/webmasters/craw...)"


And assume you have

User-agent: meta-externalagent

Disallow: /


I have observed the same from Meta's crawler.

  User-agent: *
  Disallow: /
on e.g. our preproduction site, Meta is the only big-tech crawler that accesses it, at least with an honest user agent. (Meta also accesses disallowed paths on the production site.)


I'm not defending meta here, but I should mention that meta also uses crawlers to visit pages when someone send a link through their services.

   User-agent: *
can be ignored by bots, but if they ignore the disallow rule for their own UA, they can easily be blocked by network AS.


They don't obey *, they don't get their own entry. I'd rather just poison their data, it's a well known behavior from them.

https://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1sdzd1q/metas_ai_cr...


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: