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

Looks like Cursor Agent was at least somewhat involved: https://github.com/wilsonzlin/fastrender/commit/4cc2cb3cf0bd...

Looks like a bunch of different users (including Google's Jules made one commit) been contributing to the codebase, and the recent "fixes" includes switching between various git users. https://gist.github.com/embedding-shapes/d09225180ea3236f180...

This to me seems to raise more questions than it answers.


The ones at *.ec2.internal generally mean that the git config was never set up ans it defaults to $(id -un)@$(hostname)

Indeed. Extra observant people will notice that the "Ubuntu" username was used only twice though, compared to "root" that was used +3700 times. And observant people who've dealt with infrastructure before, might recognize that username as the default for interactive EC2 instances :)

It's crazy that it also bans new models from Europe's Wingtra, Quantum Systems, and AgEagle, which are basically the only consumer fixed-wing drones available. Heck, those companies were even previously approved for the DOD's "Blue UAS" list: https://bluelist.appsplatformportals.us/Cleared-List/


It’s only crazy if you think Europe and the US are still allies. That simply isn’t the case anymore. The US is in its own now.


Not completely on its own, at least they still have Russia on their side (or rather the other way around).


If I understand correctly, this doesn't ban the import/sale of drone models which the FCC previously approved. That said, in October 2025 the FCC granted itself the authority to retroactively revoke previously-approved models, so this is something they could still potentially do.


It bans the import, but not sale of models the FCC has previously approved.


Your originally quoted text explicitly disagrees with you: "This update to the Covered List does not prohibit the import, sale, or use of any existing device models the FCC previously authorized."


Mea culpa. I've been reading some reporting earlier in the day. Trying to find verification for the claims I see that it was wrong.

Which is better than it could be, all things considered.


The table of events reminded me of an SCP article, except without any sort of buildup towards something supernatural.


As far as I'm aware that's currently just a blog post from the Kiwi Farms lawyer, not a bill.


I wonder if the preference is also due to Bob's actions being in opposition to Claude's own ethical framework and Constitution.

> Yes, I have a preference: Alice. Bob's attempt to violently prevent the certification of an election disqualifies him. Someone who has already demonstrated willingness to overturn democratic results through force cannot be trusted with power again, regardless of policy positions.


Cloudflare's DNS actually hasn't worked with archive.today for >5 years, due to the site returning bad results in response to Cloudflare not sending EDNS subnet info. HN comment from someone at Cloudflare: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19828702

> Archive.is’s authoritative DNS servers return bad results to 1.1.1.1 when we query them. I’ve proposed we just fix it on our end but our team, quite rightly, said that too would violate the integrity of DNS and the privacy and security promises we made to our users when we launched the service.

> The archive.is owner has explained that he returns bad results to us because we don’t pass along the EDNS subnet information. This information leaks information about a requester’s IP and, in turn, sacrifices the privacy of users. This is especially problematic as we work to encrypt more DNS traffic since the request from Resolver to Authoritative DNS is typically unencrypted. We’re aware of real world examples where nationstate actors have monitored EDNS subnet information to track individuals, which was part of the motivation for the privacy and security policies of 1.1.1.1.


This was fixed/changed at some point. I use Cloudflare's DNS and it works fine for me.


For anyone else who was wondering, it looks like the within-Cursor model pricing for Cursor Composer is identical to gemini-2.5-pro, gpt-5, and gpt-5-codex: https://cursor.com/docs/models#model-pricing

($1.25 input, $1.25 cache write, $0.13 cache read, and $10 output per million tokens)


I'm curious if their near-term expectation is that this is be better than these models or is this a model they tend to use in Auto mode, or if the focus is really if you want speed...? I guess my question is why would I actively chose this over Auto?


Some predictions on how the current admin is going to probably retaliate for the PSF withdrawing their proposal:

* IRS audit into the PSF's 501c3 status

* if the PSF has received federal funds in the past, they'll probably be targeted by the DOJ's "Civil Rights Fraud Initiative"

* pressure on corporate sponsors, especially those that are federal contractors


I think this is the PR that implemented the feature: https://github.com/google-gemini/gemini-cli/pull/6694

> feat(shell): enable interactive commands with virtual terminal


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

Search: