Great time to see this here. This morning I, in Canada, reached out to a friend in Ukraine and asked "I might be over-reacting, but what do you wish you knew before the war started?"
His response was "You're not over reacting, you might be under-reacting, worst case you end up with some cool new toys. Best case, you're more prepared than anyone else."
So yeah, here we are. Good article to add to my research.
> Generator 5kw - you want something with a higher duty cycle than you need so it can run for extended periods
Note that fossil fuel can age out, even with stabilizer.
There are dual- and tri-fuel generators out there that can use natural/methane gas and/or propane. Consider propane as you can get pretty big bottles and it does not expire so can sit around for long periods of time.
yeah used to manage data centers, diesel breaks down after a while, petrol even faster.
you can put in additives to extend the life, and specialized storage can squeak even more out, but ultimately you can't plan on it being good past 12 months, maybe as low as 5-6 if conditions aren't great.
we ran / tested the generators weekly, both just to exercise them and confirm they're good, but also just to burn off old fuel.
If you have a solar panels, a battery, and generator, it would be good idea to figure out how to hook them all together. Using the generator near its full output, to charge the battery, will use far less fuel than idling it all day.
Even if things are bad enough for iodine pills, they are only really needed for children. Once you hit your mid teens, your thyroid is fully developed and not pulling in enough iodine to worry about radioactive isotopes.
I presume that radiation is why the Ukrainian brought it up.
The article did mention using it for treating water, but it's not very good at that, and it tastes awful. Reverse osmosis works much, much better and it doesn't need to be a large permanently installed system; portable gravity-fed versions readily available.
I was thinking the other day that ALL drones SHOULD be considered LIVE explosives. It's probably never a good idea to handle one if you're not trained.
Last march i was at SxSw and the police drones over head were a first for me. I was in this large crowd of people, and thought "yeah i dont like this". How do i know they're not just some bad actors drone with red and blue lights?
I think my exposure to casual discussions of how to arm drones with my Ukrainian friend, and the videos we've all seen on Reddit about drones in Ukraine, have really made their presence feel unwelcome.
It depends on a number of factors about legality, but the hardware to make a drone that doesn't have software forcing it to follow the law is cheap and plentiful. Its not particularly hard to get either, even with the drone ban.
For ~$200 you can build a very good FPV drone that can carry a dangerous payload and travel at highway speeds. Another ~$200 buys you the video receiver and a controller.
Warfare yes, but that's all warfare that's terrifying. Similarly you can make a point that for $10 you can buy a knife that can be used in all different morbid crimes.
FPV drones as a fun hobby in the rest of the world has had, in the last 10 years since it became somewhat popular, a total of zero fatalities or serious injuries. Don't let the irrational fear guide you towards further unnecessary regulation that makes others' lives worse.
A toddler lost an eye, several hospitalizations of unrelated bystanders, multiple aircraft damaged in midair collisions, and an attempted assassination of a world leader are some of the highlights. Not exactly a squeaky clean record with no “serious injuries”, even if you ignore the intentional assassination attempt. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unmanned_aerial_vehicl...
I think FPV and drones are awesome, and have built several myself. It is pretty hard to argue that they are not also very dangerous in the wrong hands. Are there more dangerous things in the world? Sure, but that doesn’t mean people should ignore an easy attack vector. Given the temperature of things currently, I would be incredibly nervous to hear a drone at a protest or political event.
Regulations are coming whether regular Joe wants them or not. Drones had moved from toy hobby to dealing with weapons and explosives level of scrutiny and this is not reverting anytime soon.
I saw writing on the wall and donated in 2022 my dji drone to Ukrainian army, hopefully it was used well for defense of their homeland. I don't want to have a hobby that I need to do covertly and illegally, and last thing I want to do during vacations is dealing with bureaucracy.
is the last point correct?
"Get familiar with remote detonation with drones, these are what we use to set off the molotovs:"
seems off for this list, like way off and more on military/offence side of type of thing?
and why would you need a 300m+ ethernet cable in a disaster?
Totally valid use case for sure, and we discussed this because I do have a Starlink dish, but honestly, in a conflict with the US...I don't think a) I'd want to use starlink and b) i'd expect it to work.
Ethernet cable is a high quality cable usable for various other purposes. That includes low voltage power line, such as 12V from the car to phone charger in the house, solar panel wiring, basic tripwire alarms, command relays in the yard from the house, basic audio intercom with your neighbors when phone lines are down, etc.
Plus the obvious ethernet repairs: lines broken by fallen trees/branches in a storm, video camera cables cut by thieves, install new survillance cameras, move existing ones.
Self-supporting ethernet cable is also a decent clothesline when your dryer is not working.
In his case i didn't actually bother asking about the cat6 because i already had a huge reel in my garage, but I can think of cases such a remotely mounting satellite dish' and maybe connecting buildings to each other.
The molotov didn't seem out of range for me honestly. Firstly because I know he was one of the first people flying drones for defence, and now they've been mass producing their own for a few years. I have to admit, it seems pretty rational to want to fight back in any way possible.
Funny, not funny, this friend and I met up in early 2020 and had a beer down the road. He was telling me he'd rented his apartment in Liviv and was moving here next week. He had to go home to get some things, hand over the unit, and then he'd be back.
Next week was the pandemic, borders closed. He never left, and now he /still/ cant.
Let politicians fight and die in their own wars. If russia "visited" my country, I'd follow it with a drink in my hand from the bahamas. No piece of dirt or earth is worth dying for, ever.
> No piece of dirt or earth is worth dying for, ever.
If no one ever defends the dirt, the pieces of earth where you can enjoy a drink in peace and freedom will shrink over time as the aggressors will continue to gobble up land because of the lack of defending.
They keep moving forward, you keep moving back, until you have no where to retreat to.
Come back to this comment in a few years and think about whether something significant has changed for those people who did not sacrifice their lives for a meaningless battle.
People are more important than the state. If they are not ready to defend him, why should they be forced? You can offer money or other valuables in return, such as fame, a pension, or a position, but if a person doesn't want to, why should they do it?
> Come back to this comment in a few years and think about whether something significant has changed for those people who did not sacrifice their lives for a meaningless battle.
My family is from Eastern Europe: if people had not fought "meaningless" battles then the land would have been ruled by genocidal maniacs. As it stand my grandmother almost ended up in an oven.
My very existence is the result of the battles having meaning, that people fighting matters.
Russia doesn't just "visit" your country. Lookup what Ruskiy Mir (Russian world) really means, basically your country gets subjugated by the Russians and I'm not talking about civilized or professional Russian forces - I'm talking about drunk and poor 20yo boys from a remote Russian villages that are now seeing the spoils of western civilization for the first time (do lookup what happened in Bucha, Kyiv suburbs in 2022 at the onset of invasion). Then of course the refusal of the Russians to recognize any other culture or language...the list goes on and on. So - yes, you could escape with a drink but then "If Not Me, Then Who"?
This is a lie, please stop spreading those. There are no "all barbed wire" borders, no anti-personnel mines, "guards with automatic weapons" sounds like some meme from 80s video games (which border guards anywhere in the world don't have some rifle with automatic fire mode?). Young people from Ukraine can currently travel free as far as I know.
You were thinking about russia, weren't you. Its not true even for that shithole, but much closer.
Very unlikely. Men of ages 18-60 are forbidden to leave Ukraine since February 27 or 28 of 2022. Women cannot cross the border since 2023.
Of course, there should be some exceptions. For example, some people need to go abroad to bring Western supplied munitions, officials can leave to visit other countries, etc.
But almost 100% of the population cannot leave Ukraine under any circumstances.
I have spoken with several Ukrainian women who have crossed the border several times since 2023. They live and work in Poland or Czechia, but go visit Ukraine once or twice a year. Note they're Ukrainian citizens, and do not have Czech nor Polish citizenship.
I don't follow Ukrainian laws closely. I remember they allowed young men of ages 18-22 to cross the border in August 2025 (!). That caused enormous lines on the borders as the first day after this law 11,000 young men fled the country.
But that only about men of age 18-22. Men of age 22-60 still cannot leave the country. And 18-22 couldn't leave the country for three years.
Honest question: why do you comment when you clearly have no idea what you are talking about? You make all kinds of false claims, and then people who actually know have to correct you.
You skipped the part where I said I work with Ukrainians? I work with them on a weekly basis for 13 years.
> Can you show an Ukrainian law that allows men to freely cross the border?
Did I say he crossed it legally? He crossed it illegally of course, which according to you was impossible due to guards with automatic rifles, drones and anti-personnel mines.
> half of my family lives in Ukraine.
My bet: You haven't spoken with them in years, because they cut connections due to your political views. Just as I will now.
The world we're headed for there is no "other place" to escape to. Many people's view of survival during collapse ultimately assumes the existence of a fairly large "safe haven" space for which they just need to survive until they get there.
That depends on a lot of personal things. I remember a Ukrainian I personally know, leaving after the 2014 invasion.
When Russia was doing "exercises" at their border in 2022, I asked them in a meeting what they felt (guys living in Lviv). Most of them thought Russia would have done it in 2014 already, and now it didn't make much sense. Only 1 person responded he filled up his gas tank. But in the end, nobody left Lviv right after the invasion.
Cool new toys! I like it. I've recently been thinking of branching into more water sports such as rowing, ocean swimming and the like to have a better shot at surviving out at sea. Hopefully I've gotten some mountains covered by now.
You’re right but i have always preferred people who can do a little more. Nothing against the socially awkward and conflict avoidant nature in many of these friends, but people who push back and fight to communicate their views and passions often got our team better outcomes than someone who just turns up and does the work they’re asked to do.
As long as it is not opposite set of skills (talks a lot without knowledge to back it up so essentially using charisma to convince people to do the wrong thing most of the time) then yes, a lil bit of negotiation can save you a whole lot of work in the long run (XY problems being one example)
For sure, I’ve been tricked into hiring those people before too. It’s good that there’s still something hard in running an organization, the whole “what is value?” question feels like it’ll be one of the few things we have to maintain work for humans over the next little while.
It’s great seeing the numbers continue to hold after a decent period of time.
We’ve noticed after 6 years out Tesla, the battery seems to charge slower than it used to, but otherwise all is well. I just love the convenience of charging at home, gas stations seem so odd and antiquated now.
Claude opus is absurdly amazing. I now spent around $100-200 a day using it. Gemini and all the OpenAI models can’t me up right now.
Having said that, Google are killing it at the image editing right now. Makes me wonder if that’s because of some library of content and once Anthropocene acquires the same they’ll blow us away there too.
I went for cursor on the $200 plan but i hit those limits in a few days. Claude code came out after i got used to cursor but I've been intending to switch it up on the hope the cost is better.
I go api directly after i hit those limits. That’s where it gets expensive.
I’m a solo founder, past life I’ve done the whole raise 8 figures, hire a hundred plus people…this is a way better life. Currently around 430k arr and growing.
Really? Are you using many multiple agents a time? I'm on Microsoft's $40/mo plan and even using Opus 4.5 all day (one agent at a time), I'm not reaching the limit.
Yeah maybe I’m crazy, i mean i don’t know what to say. I do feel like the productivity i get now is akin to what i would have expected from a small team of 4-5 people 5 years ago..it’s cheaper than hiring coworkers but certainly not cheap haha
Everyone’s all about OpenAI v Google, meanwhile i spend 99% of my day with Claude.
It’s less about it having to be a Google product personally, it just needs to be better, which outside of image editing in Gemini pro 3 image, it is not.
I like Claude. I want to use it. But I just never feel comfortable with the usage limits at the ($20/month level at least) and it often feels like those limits are a moving, sometimes obfuscated target. Apparently something irritating happened with those limits over the holidays that convinced a colleague of mine to switch off Claude to Gemini, but I didn't dig for details.
The only thing I'm aware of is that they drastically increased limits between Christmas and new years day. Message might have even said unlimited, I don't recall precisely.
Okay, he says they drastically (though temporarily) increased limits after surprising users with reduced limits that generated a strong reaction. This is the definition of hearsay though.
It’ not Google that’s dead. It’s the economy in North American markets. I am finding conversion way down, clicks and impressions I’m still getting. People are just being way more fussy before handing over cash.
Everyone i talk to is quoting the same time line, this started in September and it hasn’t returned to normal.
Yes this 100%. Every person i speak with who is excited about MCP is some LinkedIn Guru or product expert. I'm yet to encounter a seriously technical person excited by any of this.
The problem isn’t having a standard way for agents to branch out. The problem is that AI is the new Javascript web framework: there’s nothing wrong with frameworks, but when everyone and their son are writing a new framework and half those frameworks barely work, you end up with a buggy, fragmented ecosystem.
I get why this happens. Startups want VC money, established companies then want to appear relevant, and then software engineers and students feel pressured to prove they’re hireable. And you end up with one giant pissing contest where half the players likely see the ridiculousness of the situation but have little choice other than to join party.
I have found MCPs to be very useful (albeit with some severe and problematic limitations in the protocol's design). You can bundle them and configure them with a desktop LLM client and distribute them to an organization via something like Jamf. In the context I work in (biotech) I've found it a pretty high-ROI way to give lots of different types of researchers access to a variety of tools and data very cheaply.
I believe you, but can you elaborate? What exactly does MCP give you in this context? How do you use it? I always get high level answers and I'm yet to be convinced, but i would love this to be one of those experiences where i walk away being wrong and learning something new.
Sure, absolutely. Before I do, let me just say, this tooling took a lot of work and problem solving to establish in the enterprise, and it's still far from perfect. MCPs are extremely useful IMO, but there are a lot of bad MCP servers out there and even good ones are NOT easy to integrate into a corporate context. So I'm certainly not surprised when I hear about frustrations. I'm far from an LLM hype man myself.
Anyway: a lot of earlier stages of drug discovery involve pulling in lots of public datasets, scouring scientific literature for information related to a molecule, a protein, a disease, etc. You join that with your own data and laboratory capabilities and commercial strategy in order to spot opportunities for new drugs that you could maybe, one day, take into the clinic. This is traditionally an extremely time consuming and bias prone activity, and whole startups have gone up around trying to make it easier.
A lot of the public datasets have MCPs someone has put together around someone's REST API. (For example, a while ago Anthropic released "Claude for Life Sciences" which was just a collection of MCPs they had developed over some popular public resources like PubMed).
For those datasets that don't have open source MCPs, and for our proprietary datasets, we stand up our own MCPs which function as gateways for e.g. running SQL queries or Spark jobs against those datasets. We also include MCPs for writing and running Python scripts using popular bioinformatics libraries, etc. We bundle them with `mcpb` so they can be made into a fully configured one-click installer you can load into desktop LLM clients like Claude Desktop or LibreChat. Then our IT team can provision these fully configured tools for everyone in our organization using MDM tools like Jamf.
We manage the underlying data with classical data engineering patterns, ETL jobs, data definition catalogs, etc, and give MCP-enabled tools to our researchers as front end concierge type tools. And once they find something they like, we also have MCPs which can help transform those queries into new views, ETL scripts, etc and serve them using our non-LLM infra, or save tables, protein renderings, graphs, etc and upload them into docs or spreadsheets to be shared with their peers. Part of the reason we have set it up this way is to work through the limitations of MCPs (e.g. all responses have to go through the context window, so you can't pass large files around or trust that it's not mangling the responses). But also we do this so as to end up with repeatable/predictable data assets instead of LLM-only workflows. After the exploration is done, the idea is you use the artifact, not the LLM, to intact with it (though of course you can interact with the artifact in an LLM-assisted workflow as you iterate once again in developing a yet another derivative artifact).
Some of why this works for us is perhaps unique to the research context where the process of deciding what to do and evaluating what has already been done is a big part of daily work. But I also think there are opportunities in other areas, e.g. SRE workflows pulling logs from Kubernetes pods and comparing to Grafana metrics, saving the result as a new dashboard, and so on.
What these workflows all have in common, IMO, is that there are humans using the LLM as an aid to dive understanding, and then translating that understanding into more traditional, reliable tools. For this reason, I tend to think that the concept of autonomous "agents" is stupid, outside of a few very narrow contexts. That is to say, once you know what you want, you are generally better off with a reliable, predictable, LLM-free application, but LLMs are very useful in the prices of figuring out what you want. And MCPs are helpful there.
This is fascinating. I really appreciate the length reply.
How do you handle versioning/updates when datasets change? Do the MCPs break or do you have some abstraction layer?
What's your hit rate on researchers actually converting LLM explorations into permanent artifacts vs just using it as a one-off?
Makes sense for research workflows. Do you think this pattern (LLM exploration > traditional tools) generalizes outside domains with high uncertainty? Or is it specifically valuable where 'deciding what to do' is the hard part?
Someone else mentioned using Chrome dev tools + Cursor, I'm going to try that one out as a way to convince myself here. I want to make this work but I just feel like I'm missing something. The problem is clearly me, so I guess i need to put in some time here.
I'll give you a short reply, as another person who finds MCP very useful. I think a big gap is that MCP's are often marketed as "taking actions" for you, because that's flashy and looks cool in the eyes of laymen. While most of their actual value is the opposite, in using them to gather information to take better non-MCP actions. Connecting them to logs, read-only to (e.g. mock) databases, knowledge bases, and so on. All for querying, not for create/update/delete.
> How do you handle versioning/updates when datasets change?
For data MCPs, we use remote MCPs that are served over an stdio bridge. So our configuration is just mcp-proxy[0] pointed at a fixed URL we control. The server has an /mcp endpoint that provides tools and that endpoint is hit whenever the desktop LLM starts up. So adding/removing/altering tools is simply a matter of changing that service and redeploying that API. (Note: There are sometimes complications, e.g. if I change an endpoint that used to return data directly, but now it writes a file to cloud storage and returns a URL (because the result is to large, i.e. to work around the aforementioned broken factor of MCP) we have to sync with our IT team to deploy a configuration change to everyone's machine.)
I have seen nicer implementations that use a full MCP gateway that does another proxy step to the upstream MCP servers, which I haven't used myself (though I want to). The added benefit is that you can log/track which MCPs your users are using most often and how they are doing, and you can abstract away a lot of the details of auth, monitor for security issues, etc. One of the projects I've looked at in that space is Mint MCP, but I haven't used it myself.
> What's your hit rate on researchers actually converting LLM explorations into permanent artifacts vs just using it as a one-off?
Low. Which in our case is ideal, since most research ideas can be quickly discarded and save us a ton of time and money that would otherwise be spent running doomed lab experiments, etc. As you get later in the drug discovery pipeline you have a larger team built around the program, and then the artifacts are more helpful. There still isn't much of a norm in the biotech industry of having an engineering team support an advanced drug program (a mistake, IMO) so these artifacts go a long way given these teams don't have dedicated resources.
> Do you think this pattern (LLM exploration > traditional tools) generalizes outside domains with high uncertainty?
I don't know for sure, as I don't live in that world. My instinct is: I wouldn't necessarily roll something like this out to external customers if you have a well-defined product. (IMO there just isn't that much of a market for uncertain outputs of such products, which is why all of the SaaS companies that have launched their integrated AI tools haven't seen much success with them.) But even within a domain like that, it can be useful to e.g. your customer support team, your engineers, etc. For example, one of the ideas on my "cool projects" list is an SRE toolkit that can query across K8s, Loki/Prometheus, your cloud provider, your git provider and help quickly diagnose production issues. I imagine the result of such an exploration would almost always be a new dashboard/alert/etc.
I use only one MCP, but I use it a lot: it's chrome devtools. I get Claude Code to test in the browser, which makes a huge difference when I want it to fix a bug I found in the browser - or if I just want it to do a real world test on something it just built.
I have found MCPs helpful. Recently, I used one to migrate a site from WordPress to Sanity. I pasted in the markdown from the original site and told it to create documents that matched my schemas. This was much quicker and more flexible than whipping up a singular migration tool. The Sanity MCP uses oAuth so I also didn’t need to do anything in order to connect to my protected dataset. Just log in. I’ll definitely be using this method in the future for different migrations.
When the inexperienced move to become rare and on the frontier, sure they get an advantage but the field doesn’t get the benefit, they do. This is why the early days of Node were awful. So many jr devs (that’s being generous, mostly designers with a base knowledge of js) were jumping from writing front ends to entire stacks. They won, the stacks lost.
Experience matters and it’s an advantage, that’s not a reason for new people not to compete but rather one to understand that context and use it to help them grow.
Couldn’t agree more (but frustratingly due to HN’ shitty mobile experience i downvoted this, sorry!)
In a past life i used to complain that people only praised my work after i fucked up and subsequently fixed it. I’d go month on month of great execution and all I’d hear would be complaints, but as soon as i “fixed” a major issue, i was a hero.
I’ve learn that setting appropriate incentives is the hardest part of building an effective organization.
I had to mention this in an early startup, when I did some firefighting, and the biz people were praising that. I said I wanted to set a culture in which engineering was rewarded for making things just happen and work, not for firefighting.
A nice thing about early startups is that it's the easiest time to try to set engineering culture like this on a good track. Once you start hiring people, they will either cement elements of whatever culture you're setting, or they'll bring a poor culture with them.
(My current understanding, if you find your culture has been corrupted with a clique/wolfpack of mercenary ex-FAANG people, or a bunch of performative sprint theatre seatwarmers, is that you either have to excise/amputate everywhere the cancer has spread, or accept that you're stuck with a shit culture forever.)
> (My current understanding, if you find your culture has been corrupted with a clique/wolfpack of mercenary ex-FAANG people, or a bunch of performative sprint theatre seatwarmers, is that you either have to excise/amputate everywhere the cancer has spread, or accept that you're stuck with a shit culture forever.)
You just described my last job. It went from one of the most productive (and I mean we fucking SHIPPED - quality work, usually the first time around), engaging, and fun places I've ever worked to a place where a new VP would sit in every single group's sprint planing, retros, and standups and interject if we deviated one iota from a very orthodox scrum framework. The engineering turnover was pretty much 95% within a year, with only the most junior people remaining because they didn't really know better to move on. Work slowed, tech debt ballooned, but OMFG were the product managers happy because they were also allowed in every step of the way.
Work slowed to a crawl, too. Eventually a private equity firm swooped in and made things even worse...
That sounds like there was some top-down, or mid-down, culture changing (which can easily happen as a company tries to build a hierarchy, drawing from outside).
Another risk is bottom-up culture. You could have your existing leadership the same, but you start hiring ICs who bring their culture with them, and you fail to nurture the desired culture.
I think one of the concerns with early startups is if the early engineering leadership hasn't gotten respect and buy-in from the CEO, as the company grows. If the early engineering leadership was doing unusually solid work and culture, but the CEO thinks they are just random fungible commodities, and that now it's time for a different mode, then CEO will probably urinate away all that corporate strength very quickly.
The company was founded by an ideas guy (not technical) and the first hire was the (technical) CTO. The CTO set the initial excellent engineering culture. The way I saw it, the founder had no choice but to defer to the engineering team in the beginning because without them there was no future. However, once we started bringing in revenue, the pressure and interference from the CEO started to mount until the CTO essentially got tired of it and moved on. The CEO wasn't even a terrible person, but had trouble dealing with pushback (and I've chatted with him after and he admits he was wrong - he was also in his early 20s during all of this).
The CTO position was never replaced and, I'm not making this up, the head of product was made VP of engineering. An external director of engineering was brought in to implement business metrics, tracking, process etc that all answered to this VP of product. Any sense of balance was removed and the highest ranking advocates for tech were team leads. The VP of Eng wasn't necessarily evil, but couldn't or wouldn't do anything that got in the way of business and couldn't convey how important it was to sometimes take a step back.
We did alright financially, though. We had an exit (not enough for me to retire, but at 45 I essentially don't have to save for it anymore if that makes sense) and moved on, but the slowed down development meant that some other new ideas were only finally gaining traction when the PE firm gobbled us up. I personally think had things remained as they were, or changed (as companies do need to as they grow) more positively, we'd have been much more successful.
His response was "You're not over reacting, you might be under-reacting, worst case you end up with some cool new toys. Best case, you're more prepared than anyone else."
So yeah, here we are. Good article to add to my research.
reply