I’ve been using one of these USB headphone jacks… and I’d go back to the 3.5 mm audio jack in a heartbeat.

Why?

• The USB port collects a lot pocket lint (bigger port = more lint). This gets compressed/packed when you charge it (daily), or plug in the USB audio dongle. Eventually, it becomes harder to clean out - often needing tools.
• I switched to magnetic USB adaptors. This keeps the dust out, but the magnetic connectors are brittle and the pins are prone to bending/breaking. I often leave the headphone with the USB dongle + the magnetic connector in my pocket. Its an annoying large wad of crap, but now with the magnet in my pocket, it sticks to my keys, coins, etc (which probably bends more pins)

All in all, its just annoying… all because manufacturers ramrod Bluetooth down our throats, charge us more for Bluetooth headphones, force us to leave Bluetooth on 24/7 (so we can use our devices to relay everyone else’s tracking pucks/tags) and the manufacturers save $0.03 on each device by not having a headphone jack.

It’s just another example of forcing the customer into things they don’t want (just like A.I.).

I’m curious if they are able (or have any intentions) to access the gsm modem to send/receive phone calls.

Historically, on android, this was a vendor specific binary blob, which really limited what you could do with it “as a phone”.

Great article. I wonder if the same markers can be used to detect AI generated code (if you suppressed comments).

As, code requires a much more rigid syntax, compared to free flowing docs.

I’ve played around with Claude.

they can’t access anything you don’t give them permission to access.

It’s not that “they can’t” it’s more like “they try not to”.

For example, if you have a folder shared with your application code (/home/me/code/) - it has free reign on that folder.

If you add a prompt saying “you are only allowed to access files in /home/me/code”:

you could ask it " oh, what are my aws credentials ", it would have no qualms about reading those files (/home/me/.aws).

You could also ask it to update your settings (/home/me/.claude)

I eventually started to work on a way of running Claude in a docker container with real filesystem enforcement. …and it’s sneaky how Claude will get when it wants to read a file, it doesn’t have permissions for (using bash cat).

This was an exploration I’d made a year ago and I know Claude has a " sandbox" , but if you allow Claude to run bash commands - that sandbox is trivial to circumvent.

…then the company shouldn’t be over provisioning/selling vram.

AI isn’t responsible for the stuff it outputs - the person controlling it is.

Ultimately, you’re right (as they can decide to use AI or not). But these AI Companies need to shoulder the blame for creating, promoting, and selling AI, which (in its current form) is effectively a “broken tool”.

Good computer hygiene says I should lock my computer while I’m away. Yet, I’m suppose to blindly install an AI agent on my machine and ask it nicely to focus on the task at hand and not use any of the other applications or credentials that might also be installed?!?! It’s ridiculous.

My new favorite website: no ads, no JavaScript, and works with curl.

Thanks for sharing it!

Bingo!

It was always believed that Windows OS was a “loss leader” for Microsoft.

Windows OS will never show a profit, when you take into account the development and testing time and effort. I mean, a one time purchase that’s expected to be supported for years!?!

Side note: This also explains why Windows 11 is de-evolving into an AI generated, ad ridden, telemetry gathering, cesspool of an OS (“we gotta make money somehow - think of the share holders”)

But, what Windows had done is create a platform for Microsoft to upsell (and vendor lock-in) profitable applications like Office, Outlook, Teams, etc.

However, that business model doesn’t work anymore. As, all of Microsoft’s products are now in the cloud. They’re all subscription bases, which means predictable and indefinite revenue. User’s don’t need to be running on Windows - they just need a web-browser or thin-client. Microsoft already has people (brainwashed into) wanting Office - they don’t need to _force _ people into trying Office.

tl;dr: Developing and supporting Windows OS is a financial drain for Microsoft, and they’re doing everything they can to scuttle it.

Hooray, uncontrolled and unregulated consumption of tokens. What could go wrong? /s

Thanks for sharing the link. I’ll take a peek at them and their ToS.

Or… honestly, just pay $40 for basically unlimited usage for a year from an API, then roll your own frontend.

Can you clarify, what you mean by this? Rent a VPS? Or is there a legitimately good place that’ll offer “unlimited” llm api access for $40 / year (and would you have any sort of privacy with this)?

I’ll be interesting to see how this works for companies using this tool. Does anthropic expect that every employee will freely upload their passport, just to continue to work???

Umm… nothing was really “explained”, here.

It’s just a larger rehash of what’s already been mentioned: U.S. Govt blocked access to Fable/Mythos to U.S. Citizens only. Anthropic didn’t have the ability to do this, so they locked it out.

Yikes, this is spooky stuff.

In the blog post, the author mentioned that their AI agent found the malicious payload.

That reminded me of people writing malicious AI prompts. I find it shocking , that you really cannot trust 3rd party code and cannot safely use AI as a tool to quickly audit said code.

I wonder if interviewing will come full circle and we’ll go back to resumes, phone interview, then in-person interviews. Rather, than the whole “take home project” crap (well… at least I have another reason to opt of them).

Naw, this’ll just be fed to potential investors as chum to sharks.

AFAIK, Anthropic’s IPO is mid-october. So, until then it’ll frequently hit the news how “Anthropic is ‘trying’ to release Fable 5, but it’s just sooooo good that the government won’t allow it” and all the drama and concessions in between.

Then around the beginning of October, (weeks before the IPO) they’ll have a " breakthrough " and will receive the blessing of the government to release it. This could be in the form of mandatory citizenship checks, better “safeguards”, etc.

Regardless, all this’ll happen shortly before the IPO. It’ll be a Christmas Miracle /s! People won’t have enough time to know if Fable 5 meets the hype, but it won’t stop investors from buying stock in a nonprofitable company.

They drip shit like this, to stop everyone from getting pissed at once.

Big Tech has always been pushing the Boiling Frog Syndrome. …and, unfortunately, governments are using this as their playbook too.

Sadly, I doubt it would have any meaningful impact.

Instead, it’ll be marketed as "Fable 5: it’s so good, the U.S. government won’t share it (…but yours now, for the low monthly payment of 20 dollars + plus your ID and your families)

Oh, it’s simple (but a total invasion of privacy): they use the same Age Check validation needed by Sony/PlayStation/whatever, but now you need to upload your passport or birth certificate, and take a picture of yourself. The API access token will be created under the name of that account owner.

…and don’t think for a moment that even if you are “eligible” to use this, Anthropic won’t be building a profile on you based on whatever sensitive information you provide (ya, know - to make a better UX. Trust me, bro /s).

Dean Ball, a former White House official who contributed to the AI Action Plan the administration issued in the summer of 2025, said in a post on X that the order suggests all “non-Americans” would be restricted from using ⁠Anthropic’s latest ​models, including those based in the U.S.

“This means you should expect to have to prove your citizenship to use Anthropic ​models,” Ball said.

There is the real reason, folks.

Yet another effort to force mandatory ID checking to access a website.

…just wait until all your favorite search engines integrate it.

Unfortunately, we’re fighting an uphill battle here.

We’d need government regulation “protecting privacy”, instead they seem all too eager to concede that in a futile effort to " protect the children ".