The end of software secrecy is almost upon us. The death of closed source, and the final triumph of open source.
I should have realized this a few months ago when I successfully decompiled the game of Firefighter from an ancient DOS shareware binary. My robot friend was able to tell it had been written in Borland Pascal from looking at the data layout; it gave me back very readable Pascal code with sensibly chosen function and variable names. I transpiled it to Rust and now ship it as part of my heritage games collection.
The thing is, I thought of this as a fun stunt but didn't have any confidence that the technique would scale up to large, real programs. I have since learned that people are now doing this sort of thing with entire AAA games, which are among the most complex software artifacts ever to be shipped as a binary. If they can be decompiled, anything can be.
This has implications. Massive implications. We need to think about what the world is like when, in general, there is no longer a secrecy moat around almost any software at all.
1/2
i’ve been teasing it all week, so here it is in time to ruin your weekend plans: Frontier Lab Tycoon
every mechanic you might expect (swarm sandbox escapes, hyper-competitive model releases, safety audits, researchers Posting & getting dragged on Bird App, your new Decision Model immediately getting cloned, luddite protests, EA orgies: y’know, normal 2026 things)
sold* at https://t.co/KuK9NIgwMV or any other big box retailer where high-quality software is found
Opus 5.5 + Sonnet 5.5 + @EffectTS_ + XState + Jev + god knows what else
*it’s free
I just had a sub-par experience with codex 5.6 sol ultra on one of my sprints. thought I'd give it a shot instead of fable/opus, and it ended up nerfing half the codebase with completely unnecessary bloat. added ~20k lines where only about 5k were really needed. added ~50MB in binaries that were never required to begin with. disappointing!
c4d has a great ux that's very mature, however their api is abysmal and documentation, as aforementioned, really lacks.
i wrote https://t.co/Lr2Plb6XhY for touchdesigner (the 'real-time flavour' of houdini), which includes an mcp server. agreed that both it+houdini have best-in-class documentation, and this has really helped both platforms for the mcp revolution underway
@lyft I can't use your app because of your "Freenow" promotion banner on android. tapping close crashes the app. tapping "Get the app" doesn't get rid of the ad. how did you guys let this slip into production?
@1Password how dumb does your design team think it's users are? answer: very!
it breaks the heart that after all of these years, your design team is no longer orienting this app around intelligent and sensible users; it's now designed for dummies, and everyone earned an extra click as a result of this new flow.
my condolences that your team actually shipped this, and nobody had the guts to challenge it.
Yann LeCun va probablement gagner le débat scientifique sur l'IA.
Et ça n'aura aucune importance. 👇
Le résumé tient en deux lignes : l'un des pères de l'IA quitte Meta, lève un milliard de dollars, et part prouver que les LLM, ChatGPT, Claude, Grok, sont une impasse vers l'intelligence réelle.
Sur le fond, il a sans doute raison. Un LLM ne comprend pas le monde, il prédit le mot suivant. Ni mémoire, ni modèle du réel, ni vraie planification. LeCun le dit crûment : c'est moins intelligent qu'un chat. Techniquement, dur de lui donner tort.
Sauf qu'il répond à la mauvaise question.
LeCun demande : « qu'est-ce que l'intelligence réelle ? »
Le marché, lui, demande : « qu'est-ce qui est utile, maintenant ? »
Ce ne sont pas la même question. Et les confondre, c'est l'erreur classique du chercheur.
Le marché n'a jamais payé pour de l'intelligence. Il paie pour de l'utilité.
On n'a jamais appris aux avions à battre des ailes. On se fichait de reproduire le vol « réel » des oiseaux, on voulait juste voler. Résultat : des machines qui ne comprennent rien à l'aérodynamique d'un moineau transportent des millions de gens par jour.
Les LLM, c'est pareil. Ils ne comprennent pas le monde. Et ça ne les empêche pas de réécrire ton code, rédiger ton contrat, avaler des métiers entiers. Un outil n'a pas besoin d'un modèle du monde pour valoir des trillions.
Je build avec ces modèles tous les jours. Ils sont « bêtes » au sens de LeCun. Ça ne m'a jamais empêché de shipper quoi que ce soit.
LeCun construit peut-être ce qui comptera en 2035. Mais pour les dix prochaines années, les utilisateurs, la valeur, l'argent, tout est sur les modèles « stupides ».
On confond toujours avoir raison et gagner.
LeCun aura peut-être raison. Les LLM, eux, ont déjà gagné.
@RudeOnion@AlexKepfer@AntiCommieBecca Kids is plural. Yes, many are still having *a* kid. Which is below replacement levels. Compare that to a few generations ago, when people regularly had 8-10 kids. So yeah, almost nobody is having *multiple* kids today.