The integration is a little better in Cursor; the main difference being the in-line edit diffs. But I bounce back and forth between Claude Code and cursor, so I end up just using the git diff view to look at changes about 80% of the time, so it's not much better.

Honestly, my reason for using it is that I have separate Claude and Cursor token budgets -- though I set Cursor to use Claude so I'm using the same model both ways.

If your government breaking into your house and applying hardware-level attacks to scrape your secrets out of the RAM of your running computer is seriously part of your threat model, it's almost certainly very, very far from your biggest concern.

Also, you should probably consider turning your computer off.

Entering and even taking the territory of an invader is fair and reasonable. If you don't want to be invaded, don't invade.

I'm not disputing the article's claims, just pointing out that it doesn't appear to be universal.

What I'm seeing is a significant uptick in job opportunities and recruiter pings coming my way. I haven't seen this much interest in several years. I'm a senior SWE with a focus on security and a solid resume.

My guess is that lots of senior SWEs are seeing this. Deep experience pairs very well with AI, making each engineer able to do what a team of several could do previously. This could obviously come at the expense of positions for the rest of that "team of several", though. Plus there's the other concern that if AI doesn't progress to be able to replace the senior engineer, too, the industry is eating its seed corn; when the experienced folks retire there will be no one to replace them.

That's not all companies, though. My own current employer (Applied Intuition) is hiring like crazy, at all levels and especially entry level. What's more, we're not the only ones because we're actually struggling to hire new grads. They come interview and things seem good, but then a large percentage of them decline our offer. I have no idea what we're offering new grads, but Applied's compensation seems generally good (I'm satisfied with mine).

My guess is the problem is that Applied falls into an awkward place in the Silicon Valley space of companies: Already quite big ($15B valuation) and close to IPO so the pre-IPO equity isn't likely to make you independently wealthy unlike an earlier-stage startup, but still pre-IPO so the equity can't easily be spent. So, new grads looking for a potential huge payoff are disappointed, and those looking for lots of immediate cash are also disappointed.

The thing is , Switzerland was always stuffed to the gills with germans, french and italians. I've never met a more multilingual people than the swiss.

Its always the same kicking post too, "It must be the immigrants". I had someone ranting to me the other day about how she didnt feel safe anymore and crime was thru the roof blah blah no go zones, No matter what statistics I showed her that in fact crime had consistently been dropping over 20 years and the days while certain parts of town in the 1970s and 1980s you where taking your life into your own hands entering, in 2026 those areas are mostly gentrified luxury appartments, and so on, she just wouldnt believe any of it, and its all "The immigrants are making crime!" (despite the fact that consistently immigrants are significantly lower in representation in crime stats than locally born folks).

Some people just refuse to think it over. In the end I really had to just disengage from the conversation because any data that disproves her paranoia she just takes it as evidence that people are lying using maths or something. I honestly don't how do you get someones brain unstuck from a rut like that? At a certain point, its just exasperating their crazy to even try.

I have 40 kWh of batteries in my home, for backup and time-shifting, and I participate in a grid-stabilization program with my power company. The grid never draws significant energy from my batteries -- grid stabilization doesn't need a lot of energy, just a brief spike of power to keep things stable while the operator makes other adjustments. Historically this has been unnecessary because generation was from big spinning turbines and their inertia was enough to smooth out spikes and dips in demand. But renewable-heavy grids don't have the tons of spinning steel, so batteries increasingly fill the gaps.

What do I actually see when the power company draws from my batteries? I see an otherwise-unexplained spike of 5-10 kW flowing from my batteries and into the grid, for a period of 2-5 minutes. 10 kW for 5 minutes is ~0.8 kWh, which is 2% of my house battery storage. I see a draw that large maybe once per week; usually it's much less. Bottom line: the impact on my storage is insignificant, and my house batteries are smaller than what most EVs have (my EV has a 100 kWh battery pack).

What do I get for allowing the power company to do that? For the first year of participation, I got a check for $2000. For subsequent years I'll get bill credits of up to $50/month, applied to energy charges only. I'm not sure how much that will translate to, since my net energy purchase is usually zero (thanks to solar panels). It's a great deal for the first year. Beyond that... we'll see.

Yes, I'm sure humanity's 21st century understanding of physics, despite things like the crisis in cosmology, dark matter, US military footage, etc, is fully accurate and is the absolute limit of reality's capabilities.

Its not a matter of thechnology, its a matter of physics. Assuming that humanity survive its currently self destructive trajectory and we are still around in a million years, the laws of physics will not magically change. The speed of light will still be a hard limit, both for us, and for anybody else in the universe.

The crisis in cosmology and dark matter have no bearing on this. Both the actual composition of dark matter , nor the correct value for the cosmological constant are completely independent variables to the speed of light. The resolution of these issues will not change the fact that the speed of light places hard limitations on the impossibility of casual visitation from distant stars.

Eh. Despite initial fears in 1990s about reproduction on the internet devaluing originals, copyright law and enforcement largely settled on the idea that that people posting images etc on forums and social media was largely harmless particularly if credit was given, but people using them commercially required payment. and that was an arangement that largely suited artists fine and largely ran as much on principle as legality until the AI bro's turned up and started just stealing art to transform into slop undercutting that whole agreement.

True, except that gold's actual usage price -- for industry and jewelry -- hasn't been its trading price for a very long time. As long as people have viewed it as a store of wealth its price has been inflated by that perception.

If it was a real currency, it losing value would generally be considered a positive. It means the sale of a good would earn more of the stuff. But this is where the bullshit hits the road. Its not a currency, nobody is using it to facilitate economic trade. Its just a shitty ponzi token. And the favor of the market has moved on from Dunning Krugerands to AI slop.

I wouldnt underestimate the complexity of an MMO. They are genuinely some of the most complicated software assemblages ever created, and usually involve teams of hundreds of people working for upwards of a decade just to get a beta out the door.

Creating a cloned server is a hell of an achievement.

Working from home is an alternative, one that we should use more.

(Of course, I WFH full time and have for 20 of the last 30 years, so I have a bit of a bias.)

You do know that Musk doesn't actually have a trillion dollars in *money*, right? He doesn't have anywhere remotely close to that much money. His total liquid assets are extensive, sure, maybe as much as a few billion, but nearly all of his incredible net worth isn't money. You could probably call it "potential money".

And everyone should keep in mind that this is true for basically all of the billionaires. Not that there isn't real wealth there, but it's a lot fuzzier than the numbers appear. Basically everyone with astronomical wealth mostly owns shares in companies, and how much of that value is real in any near-term sense depends on a lot of factors.

Musk's wealth is more speculative and fuzzy than most because his companies' valuation is based not on the revenues the companies generate now but theories about what they might generate in the future. Tesla's high valuation is all about the promise of self-driving cars restructuring transportation. SpaceX's is a little bit about cheap access to space changing a lot of stuff and more about AI. In all cases the high valuations are bets on world-changing technology being becoming real, and on Musk's companies being able to capture a good chunk of the resulting revenues.