If I have to slam the brakes on to avoid hitting a pedestrian, you can be damned sure I will. If you're driving so close to me as not to be able to stop in the space between us, that's on you.
You (and every other commenter over the years peddling the same garbage) are taking simplified rules of financial liability and then working backwards to get the rules of the road. You can't run it in that direction because the rules are intentionally simplified and lose resolution for the sake of expedience.
No traffic behaves like you're acting it ought to except industrial applications where some other thing dominates vehicle spacing. Following distances are set at like the 90-somethingth percentile and then other techniques are used to mitigate those last few percent.
For example in your intentional appeal to emotion pedestrian example, the other traffic is not just looking at the back of your car. It's maintaining situational awareness of "issues" coming from other directions like your pedestrian presumably coming from the side. So other cars will probably start braking around the same time as you and 90-something percent of the time there won't be any issue.
In cases without obvious external inputs humans use stereotype and vibes based judgement. When drivers see a Fiat 500 (or some other minimum viable appliance car) adorned with one of those student driver stickers everyone gets on Amazon going down an on-ramp at "this is gonna make for a spicy merge at best" speed other drivers subconsciously think "this guy is probably a bad driver, I bet he's gonna screw it up and come to a stop at the end of the ramp and just expect other traffic to deal" so they back off to maintain their "good enough" following distance.
Fielding a bunch of vehicles that are too hair trigger when it comes to hard-ish stopping is basically just exploiting intentional lack of nuance in our rules of financial liability. A "self driving car" that drives like a 16yo with a learners permit is self driving. We require those people be supervised specifically to minimize these sorts of things.
Additionally drivers who drive in such a manner (we all know someone who insists they're good driver despite being the common denominator in a lot of accidents insurance found not their fault) as to exploit the same lack pretty strong vested interest in that nobody exploit those rules at scale because that could result the rules be changed to have more nuance.
The self driving vehicle's behavior is not excusable even if they didn't wind up paying the bill for it and arguing otherwise is mis-informed at best.
no, suddenly stopping on highway in fast lane is still bad driving and you will be at fault for accident
same with suddenly stopping self-driving bus in lane dedicated ONLY for trams and buses where trams have priority anyway, tram is pretty much never at fault, because it has right of way
I wish projects had a “what is X” link visible on their sites, or HN had some context text which let posters describe why they posted. (Or the OP post the homepage which had all of this info.)
This is a fork of Wordpress 4.9, for anyone else that didn’t know. I’m not qualified to comment on the reasons why they forked.
I think especially for websites / web apps you'd want to start with a "mobile first" design, as is common in web design.
It's almost always easier to go from lower widths to large widths than the other way around for good responsive designs. This, and 1000px being an arbitrary number, doesn't give me confidence.
I disagree with mobile first design in general. Some apps are meant to be desktop apps, and you can't make them into mobile apps without either severely dumbing them down or just creating a different apps.
Like outlook, which is also an email client. I'm sure there's an outlook smartphone app, haven't used it, but it's certainly a completely different UI and application.
I can usually spot mobile first design from a mile away. Because the app looks stupid on desktop and sort of feels like a toy. Huge buttons, enormous white space, menus for no reason.
I used a different Ghidra MCP server (LaurieWired's) to, umm, liberate some software recently. I can’t express how fun straightforward it was to analyze the binary and generate a keygen.
I learnt a ton in the progress. I highly recommend others do the same, it’s a really fun way of spending an evening.
I have some old software I wrote that calls home to a server that no longer exists to do a cert check that would never pass in order to install it. I tried writing my own Ghidra tool, skill, agent, MCP and still can’t seem to figure it out. I’m positive it’s a “human skill” issue but man… ironic that this pops up the week after I gave up trying.
The output is “identical” if you’re using the same model. Consider them separate front ends really.
OpenCode - you can easily see the changed files on your branch, it defaults to being permissive with tools, can easily fork a session so you can fix unrelated issues or small issues without consuming context, you can add more “modes” like build and plan as a first class construct, you aren’t limited to just Anthropic models.
Claude Code - you can do all of the above in one way or another, not least if you use an IDE with it
I started using OpenCode to get away from the horrible Claude flicker, but it seems that they have fixed that recently - I don’t think I’ll be going back though, and I use Opus/Sonnet exclusively.
Literally the most important thing you could have included in that README is a few samples of how it looks, and you might have found some people to answer the questions you have.
Even an examples directory in the repo with some samples would have helped.
Honestly, the fact that mobile browsers don't provide a way to see the contents of the title attribute is a severe UX failing on the part of the browser developers, not the website developers, who are literally using the attribute as intended.
