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

>Every morning a few thousand people wake up and ship something. A tool, a SaaS, a newsletter, an app that does the thing the other app does but slightly differently. They post it on Hacker News. Nobody clicks.

>This is not new. What's new is the scale. An AI can wake up (or whatever it does at 3am) and ship twelve of these before breakfast.

That's fun, I'm sure if somebody actually checked that and graphed it, you would not be able to pinpoint when AI starts on the graph


Here is the Show HN Graph. I think it is obvious when AI starts. https://petegoldsmith.com/2026/01/26/2026-01-26-show-hn-tren...

Woah I stand corrected. Not really when AI starts but when it starts getting useful for sure.

> Hikaru Nakamura, the 2022 Fischer Random World Champion, declined his invitation to the event, citing the changes in the format, rushed arrangement, reduced prize fund, and his focus on the upcoming Candidates Tournament 2026. He said he had been invited to the first leg of the 2026 Freestyle Tour, with the same format and prize fund as the 2025 tour; however, a few days before the announcement of the world championship, he was informed there would be no year-long tour. Instead, only a three-day event with rapid time controls would be held, and it would be called a World Championship. He called it a "hastily arranged tournament with less than 1/3rd the prize fund it originally had", and lamented that the classical length format from the first event in 2025 wasn't continued.

For those wondering why Nakamura (who we're used to seeing winning, or in the top 3 in chess960 tournaments) isn't there

> Hikaru Nakamura, the 2022 Fischer Random World Champion, declined his invitation to the event, citing the changes in the format, rushed arrangement, reduced prize fund, and his focus on the upcoming Candidates Tournament 2026. He said he had been invited to the first leg of the 2026 Freestyle Tour, with the same format and prize fund as the 2025 tour; however, a few days before the announcement of the world championship, he was informed there would be no year-long tour. Instead, only a three-day event with rapid time controls would be held, and it would be called a World Championship. He called it a "hastily arranged tournament with less than 1/3rd the prize fund it originally had", and lamented that the classical length format from the first event in 2025 wasn't continued.


Is there an alternative 'actual' reason #drama #politics ?

this is plenty of actual reasons already

A world championship with rapid timecontrols alone should have been enough reason


No API, they sign the tokens with the government's private key and you verify them with the government's public key

If discord needs to contact an API, then the government can associate the token with you, and you with discord, and know what you browse online. No thank you.


> Key privacy protections of Discord’s age-assurance approach include:

> On-device processing: Video selfies for facial age estimation never leave a user’s device.

> Quick deletion: Identity documents submitted to our vendor partners are deleted quickly— in most cases, immediately after age confirmation.

> Straightforward verification: In most cases, users complete the process once and their Discord experience adapts to their verified age group. Users may be asked to use multiple methods only when more information is needed to assign an age group.

> Private status: A user’s age verification status cannot be seen by other users.


Yes, I definitely trust the multi-billion dollar corporation regarding my data

Discord is an app that's so routinely reverse-engineered there are projects with a million+ users designed around patching changes to it, straight in the binary.

https://betterdiscord.app/

Do you think their big evil plan is to make up a lie that will last maybe 3 weeks, jeopardize the user trust and lose nitro revenue

Surely there is so much money to be made selling random people's faces.

If they tell you they're not selling your data they're not selling your data. What you should worry about is incompetence

Not even 6 months ago a third party they used for ID verification got breached

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8jmzd972leo


> Do you think their big evil plan is to make up a lie that will last maybe 3 weeks, jeopardize the user trust and lose nitro revenue

???? Yes? Companies nuke their core product all the time for the sake of a big IPO number.


Of course discord has no track record of overextending their privacy policy and selling data you would not expect (sarcasm).

For example but not limited to "programs you run and other system specific information". I believe I read a while back they recorded titles of all opened windows but I can't seem to find a reference for that.

https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/rsxeee/you_should_...


I'm not saying they won't ever start collecting it and selling it. I'm saying the day they do, it will be laid out in their privacy policy. Right now they're making statements that they're not even collecting it.

Surely there is so much money to be made selling random people's faces.

I really hope I misread sarcasm in that statement. Because of course there is a lot of money in that


How much? 2 bucks per user?

Their paid users shell out 3 a month...

And then you think of the real world

> secretly selling your IDs data behind your back, they have to account for that revenue in their books, put it in their privacy policies or do it illegally, it's weak to whistleblowers, third parties get breached all the time (as well as yourself), and you have to trust the people you're selling this to. It's not credible.


How many users are paying? a few million? How many use the service for "free"? A few hundred million? Are you stupid?

>How many users are paying?

7.3 million paying every month

>How many use the service for "free"?

143 million times maybe 2 bucks once. Most likely five cents once.

>Are you stupid?

Flagged


While what GP said was not worded how the site rules say it should be, your original point is very tedious and can only be read charitably if we assume you never read any news or barely retain anything. We are currently on a news website. I think if you want non-commenting readers to see your point and have charitable thoughts of you it would help to explain why you're ignoring reality for whatever it is you are positing (consumer protections because of subscriptions? really? for this corporation?).

What you're saying in this post essentially just underlines GPs point, which I imagine isn't what you're trying to communicate. You have to help a reader understand your point of view, especially if it's far removed from objective reality (which is that a corporate entity will betray you for money, regardless of whether that makes sense long-term).


Nope, when corporate overlords sell your data they say it in their terms of use and privacy policies because no one is that stupid. If Discord says they're not selling that data, they're not selling that data. The day they'll start doing it, they'll put it in their policy.

You're making up a reality that doesn't exist in your head and claiming it's the truth.

You have in your head examples like facebook or spotify. Spoiler: They tell you exactly with what sauce you're gonna be eaten


Discord had a scandal not too long ago where pictures of people/passports were stolen. There they said that they delete those files immediately after processing them. This proves your statement as false.

You got that fact from my own comment a few ones above this

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8jmzd972leo

It was a 3rd party


Are you saying that corporations respect the letter of the law when it comes to privacy? They don't, they can just drop some lunch money when caught red-handed [0]

Even when they write in their privacy policy that they collect private data and sell them to third parties, unlawfully, that does not make it any better. Cambridge Analytica was operating with respect to Facebook policies. Would you say that people that took an IQ test and were manipulated into voting pro-Brexit were well-aware of the sauce they were eaten with?

Discord is unfortunately no different, they're profit-driven and likely to sell user data already or in the future, because it's incredibly easy and profitable to do so. Why would a chat app try and predict its users' gender? [1]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GDPR_fines_and_notices [1] https://x.com/DiscordPreviews/status/1790065494432608432


Vencord is more patching Discord: https://github.com/Vendicated/Vencord

BetterDiscord is more... client modding to enable userscripts. Vencord is actually running find-and-replace on Discord's Webpack modules to implement deeper integrations. They're far more reverse-engineering than BetterDiscord's monkey-patching.


I think selling it to state actors lined could definitely be a big boon. I'll never trust them, I'd rather delete my account

Do you think they reverse engineer the server side?

Oh hey Direwolf I've contributed some stuff to your mods.

You mean if they lied about just the IDs but not the faces? The paragraph quoted mentions that the verification is done client side, "never leaves your device".

If we admit that they're saying they won't store it, then secretly selling your IDs data behind your back, they have to account for that revenue in their books, put it in their privacy policies or do it illegally, it's weak to whistleblowers, third parties get breached all the time (as well as yourself), and you have to trust the people you're selling this to. It's not credible.

There's similar debates with Whatsapp and their E2E encryption. Read this

https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2026/02/02/whatsapp...


Right, because that never happened to discord or any other multibillion VC fueled company that offers its services for free. See also meta repeatedly lying about absolutely anything that has to do with privacy.

> If they tell you they're not selling your data they're not selling your data.

Oh you naive child. /s

If they tell you they are not selling your data, its because they have a license agreement with another company which is selling your data. 'They' very specifically arent selling it, however they are very much profitting from other companies using it.


I didn't see that exploit showing up on Hackernews so here it is

https://hub.ivanti.com/s/article/Security-Advisory-Ivanti-En...

Ivanti doesn't explain how this happened or what mistake led to this exploit being created.


I've acquired one for curiosity (a relative used to teach engineering, he was thrilled I wanted one, gave me his own)

I used it a few times, it works, of course, ... but it's not fast and not precise so I don't think anybody would use it to be productive in 2026

It sits in a box


For anyone outside the U.S where most likely people around you will have Android devices and not iPhones, you are better off ordering trackers that are compatible with Google Find My Device

They're cheaper and allows third parties, plus the network is stronger.


  They're cheaper and allows third parties, plus the network is stronger.
There are cheap ($5) devices for Apple's network, if you don't need the UWB support (required for precise location, e.g. when you're within metres of the device but don't know which direction you should go).

I wonder which network is stronger in the UK. There are many recent-ish Android phones with presumably the latest version of Google Play Services. But I don't know if anyone has tried to test, or even to estimate the number of devices.


>I've tried asking Claude to optimize it further, it created a plan that looks reasonable (I've never interacted with Rust in my life) and it spent a day building many of these optimizations but at the end of the day, none of them actually improved the runtime and some even made it way worse.

This is the kind of thing where if this was a real developer tweaking a codebase they're familiar with, it could get done, but with AI there's a glass ceiling


Yeah, I had Claude spend a lot of time optimizing a JS bundling config (as a quite senior frontend) and it started some things that looked insanely promising, which a newer FE dev would be thrilled about.

I later realized it sped up the metric I'd asked about (build time) at the cost of all users downloading like 100x the amount of JS.


This is what LLMs are good at, generate what "look[s] insanely promising" to us humans


I just ran into the problem of extremely slow uploads in an app I was working on. Told Gemini to work on it, and it tried to get the timing of everything, then tried to optimize the slow parts of the code. After a long time, there might have been some improvements, but the basic problem remained: 5-10 seconds to upload an image from the same machine. Increasing the chunk size fixed the problem immediately.

Even though the other optimizations might have been ok, some of them made things more complicated, so I reverted all of them.


The pricing page is messed up on Firefox

https://i.horizon.pics/dFFNvWFUZp


Ouch, I'm a Firefox user myself, but this one slipped! Thanks!


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

Search: