Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | 0x0000000's commentslogin

Nothing needed to be "revived" here. The cloud sync stopped working, the device was otherwise fully functional. Author found a more convenient method for accessing files than the cloud sync, anyway.


Same in the NY/NJ/PA tri-state. Ahead of the 4th a NY state trooper sits in the parking lot of the Phantom Fireworks in Matamoras, presumably calling in NY plates for their buddy to go pull over.

We just took the back roads home instead of the highway.


> ... on my Macbook Max M5 128 GB

Local development for who? How many of y'all are rocking 128GB of memory? Am I reading Apple's site correctly that it's a $10,000 laptop?


You don't need nearly that much RAM to run Qwen 3.6 27B, though. qwen3.6:27b-q4_K_M is only 17GB, for example.


This is what I run on an M5 MacBook Air 32GB. Works great.

I’m not having it build whole features from scratch, though. I give it pretty explicit instructions closer to the class or function level, and it still saves me an immense amount of time, while I’m very connected to the code that’s written.

Definitely the sweet spot for me.


A 27B model can fit easily on a 32GB VRAM card (e.g. 5090) or a 32GB computer in RAM at FP8/Q8 (unsloth have 28.6GB Q8 files).

For 24GB VRAM cards (e.g. 4090) you can use Q6_K (22.5GB) or Q5_K_M (19.5GB) quants, possibly offloading some of the weights to RAM.


For the 35B model, ofloading to RAM doesn't slow it down much. If you have a nice CPU and a weak GPU, it will be fast enough to use.


I'm on 128GB ram strix halo, bought framework desktop for a few thousand CAD back when everyone was calling framework desktop overpriced


It wasn't $10k a month ago


Think commercial. My company invested in a local rig since privacy is important to our customers and sometimes I want to use these models on private data.


Even in that case it would make more sense to put the hardware in a server rack shared with everyone rather than inside macbooks.

At any rate it makes a stolen backpack or spilled drink a lot less damaging.


Obviously the rig is not a macbook but indeed a server rack. I'm just saying that we're using this model for local development.


I work with a lot of 3D graphics and geo stuff so I can hit the ceiling with my 48 GB mac. It's not all LLM work. I prioritized more storage than RAM with my budget. Being able to run local llms has greatly helped me understand how they work. For day to day dev I pay for Gemini or Claude.


Qwen3.6 runs great on GPU with 24GB VRAM. You could get used 3090 for it.


Certainly won't work on my M4 Pro with 24GB lol


I’m using it on a 48GB machine and it causes some lag, so it might be worse on 24, but it should run.

Unsloth recommends 18GB of RAM for Qwen3.6-27B (for their version of the model).

https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/qwen3.6


I feel you!

Sent from my 8gb M2 Mac mini.


I'm still rocking my nvidia 2060, which I had purchased for $400 at the time.

I struggle to imagine purchasing multiple 1k+ cards on my own dime.


Piracy isn't stealing regardless of whether or not buying is owning.


copyright infringement is not theft, it is also not piracy.

Piracy is a real crime, I am tempted to describe it as theft of goods under transport. But it is probably much more complex than that. It also shares many similarities with organized crime(a company of men decide to ignore the law).

Anyway you slice it, people probably just want the crime to sound(worse/cooler) than it really is. It always sorts of bugs me to equate one of the worst crimes to one of the least. Might as well call it "software rape" at that point. And that is probably closer to the actual crime than piracy.


I fully understand you, but then, copying copyrighted data can't be piracy (because literal piracy is stealing).


This kind of behavior is never tolerated in the market. Your revenue is flat; they lay you off. Right away. No trial, no nothing. Your revenue is down, right to layoffs, right away. Revenue grows but less than guidance? Layoffs. Record revenue exceeding guidance? Believe it or not, layoffs.


lol! For those that didn’t get the Parks and Rec reference: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eiyfwZVAzGw


"Gel" comment


Gel?


"Gel" == "jail"

Watch the video above to get the reference :)


Right away! Best videos in the world, gel


> This kind of behavior is never tolerated in the market

This is Cisco. They do layoffs every quarter and have been doing so since the early 2000s.


  This is outrageous. Where are the armed men who come in to take the protestors away? Where are they? This kind of behavior is never tolerated in Baraqua. You shout like that they put you in jail. Right away. No trial, no nothing. Journalists, we have a special jail for journalists. You are stealing: right to jail. You are playing music too loud: right to jail, right away. Driving too fast: jail. Slow: jail. You are charging too high prices for sweaters, glasses: you right to jail. You undercook fish? Believe it or not, jail. You overcook chicken, also jail. Undercook, overcook. You make an appointment with the dentist and you don't show up, believe it or not, jail, right away. We have the best patients in the world because of jail.


We have the best market in the world, because of ~~AI bubble~~ layoffs.


> I have an unhealthy relationship with it.

You really, really do. Please, for your own benefit, take a step back and touch grass, literally. There is so much more to this world than Github of all things.

> Every day, multiple times per day, for over 18 years... During my honeymoon while my wife is still asleep? Yeah, GitHub

This is addiction


Yeah I agree. I'm not going to pick on someone for having an unhealthy relationship with a product such that they get weepy when it goes downhill. But I do hope he recognizes how unhealthy it is, and works to improve that.


> Ironically, LLMs are especially good at evaluating documents to assess the degree that an LLM assisted their creation

Is there any evidence for this?


If anything my experience has been the opposite of this. LLM detection is guesswork for an LLM.


no


Two different numbers, no? The resignation posts specifies 110 customer meetings, the blog post you linked to about meetings during odd hours does not.


Yeah, different numbers, 110 customer meetings, the other post tracked 1-6am meetings. I'm glad I tracked 1-6am meetings since I've shared that number when people think that remote workers aren't making an effort.


Those 1-6am meetings are crazy. I’ve been fully remote for over 16 years now and my only 1-6am meetings are incident response, if I’m on call.

And I’m a nobody; that you have to do that makes it feel even crazier to me.

I admit I was a bit more flexible with that in the past, but once I had a heart attack at 40 it dawned on me any company would just replace me and keep on going while my family was going to have a much tougher time (and no help from whatever company would be employing me at the time).


Out of curiosity, do you still hold the same views as you did in the past?https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2023-03-25/is-silicon-va...


> Unfollow all of your connections

I hate that this is the only option available. I want to follow my connections, for their own posts, if any. What I don't want is to see everything they like, share, and comment on -- but LinkedIn won't let you turn that part off.


The ACME provider makes a query to the DNS server to validate the record exists and contains the right "funny string". Parent's question was whether that query is/can be made via DoH.


Perhaps I have poor imagination, but I fail to see why why it would matter?


Because nginx, as an HTTP server, could answer the query?


You want to build a DNS server into nginx so you can respond to DoH query's for the domain you are hosting on that nginx server?

Let's ignore that DoH is a client oriented protocol and there's no same way to only run a DoH server without an underlying DNS server. How do you plan to get the first certificate so the query to the DoH server doesn't get rejected for invalid certificate?


At that point you might as well use the HTTP-01 challenge. I think the whole utility of DNS-01 is that you can use it if you don't want to expose the HTTP server to the internet.


No, that’s just one of the use-cases. Also:

- wildcard certs. DNS-01 is a strict requirement here. - certs for a service whose TLS is terminated by multiple servers (e.g. load balancers). DNS-01 is a practical requirement here because only one of the terminating servers would be able to respond during an HTTP or ALPN challenge.


> DNS-01 is a practical requirement here because only one of the terminating servers would be able to respond during an HTTP or ALPN challenge.

Reverse-proxying or otherwise forwarding requests for .well-known/acme-challenge/ to a single server should be just as easy to set up as DNS-01.


But then you have to redistribute the cert from that single server to all the others. Which, yes, can be done. But then you've gotta write that glue yourself. What's more, you've now chosen a special snowflake server on whom renewals depend.

In other words, no, it's not just as easy as setting up DNS-01. Different operational characteristics, and a need for bespoke glue code.


> But then you have to redistribute the cert from that single server to all the others.

Wouldn't you have to do that anyway? Or is the idea that each server requests and renews a separate cert for itself? That sounds as if you'd have to watch out for multiple servers stepping on each other's toes during the DNS-01 challenge, if there is ever a situation where two or more servers want to renew their cert at the same time.


Yup. There’s an RFC draft that addresses this dilemma.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-acme-dns-account...


Afaiu, that's only a problem for trying to _delegate_ to multiple clients. But routine operation with multiple clients works just fine in my experience (doing multi-region load balancing). Multiple TXT records are created, I think (speaking off the top of my head).


Ah! I stand corrected.


I wanted to quickly double-check my (albeit limited) experience against docs. The RFC[0] implies the possibility of what I described (provided a well-behaved ACME client that doesn't clobber other TXT records):

   2.  Query for TXT records for the validation domain name
   
   3.  Verify that the contents of one of the TXT records match the
       digest value
And then the certbot docs[2] show how it's a well-behaved client that wouldn't clobber TXT records from concurrent instances:

> You can have multiple TXT records in place for the same name. For instance, this might happen if you are validating a challenge for a wildcard and a non-wildcard certificate at the same time. However, you should make sure to clean up old TXT records, because if the response size gets too big Let’s Encrypt will start rejecting it. > ... > It works well even if you have multiple web servers.

That bit about "multiple webservers" is a little ambiguous, but I think the preceding line indicates clearly enough how everything is supposed to work.

[0] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8555#section-8.4

[1] https://letsencrypt.org/docs/challenge-types/#dns-01-challen...


Ah, that makes sense. Thanks!


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

Search: