Genuinely curious how a date in the subheader of a changelog could have broken the CLI

edit: it seems changelog.md is assumed to be structured data and parsed at startup, and there are no tests to enforce the changelog structure: https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/16671

This is the kind of choice an LLM would make...

You might be surprised (or not, depending on how long you’ve been doing this).

You're absolutely right! ;)

Ah yes, markdown, the ultimate structure for machine-readable data

They're using Markdown for everything in LLM-land.

Someone had to come up with something even more annoying than yaml for machine-readable data. :)

its vibe coded to its teets and gets reviewed by AI

Even the title "Orbital House of Cards" is unnecessarily editorializing.

  >we introduce the Collision Realization And Substantial Harm (CRASH) Clock

The needless forced backronym is another clue. It's Cargo Cult technical writing.

Why did this need to be a (badly done) acronym at all? It's a countdown to a collision, a collision clock, but of course "crash" (in all caps no less) sounds worse, and science writing needs sciencey acronyms don't ya know...

I have to agree. I tried using it for a few months and it left me convinced I'll be paying for iCloud photos for the rest of my life.

While the FileVine service is indeed a Legal AI tool, I don't see the connection between this particular blunder and AI itself. It sure seems like any company with an inexperienced development team and thoughtless security posture could build a system with the same issues.

Specifically, it does not appear that AI is invoked in any way at the search endpoint - it is clearly piping results from some Box API.

There is none. Filevine is not even an "AI" company. They are a pretty standard SaaS that has some AI features nowadays. But the hive mind needs its food, and AI bad as we all know.

> any company with an inexperienced development team and thoughtless security posture

Point out one (1) "AI product" company that isn't described accurately by that sentence

Can confirm, my Model 3 had its lights angled too high from the factory. Only realized after a few people flashed their high beams at me during my first week driving.

Thankfully it was easy to adjust.

I had the exact same issue, and Tesla sent out a service rep to my home to complete the adjustment to spec for free. You can request it through the service menu. Haven't had anyone flash me in the year since.

Thank you for being part of the 0.01% of Tesla drivers who figured this out. I think by default they set them to "maximum height" or something. As someone in a sedan, they are infuriatingly blinding at night by default. I'm sure they're illegal, but obviously Tesla doesn't care.

Source: live within a few miles of the Tesla factory, so I get more than my fair share of them. MOST of the drivers seem completely oblivious to this.

Thank you for your service

What a quality car manufacturer!

Should it be mandatory also for the maintainers to accept these contributions? Every project would degrade into pure entropy.

If it's like jury duty, the maintainers will reject all of the developers who show any sign of independent thought or domain knowledge.

519 seems to have at least 3 solutions... feels a little underconstrained!

Did your email offer you the chance to pay yearly for $11/mo? Mine did, but I don't think the option to pay yearly exists.

There should be small pieces of whatever they hit embedded in the body & glass of the aircraft. As long as they are analyzed, the cause of this won't remain a mystery forever.

Unless it was hail.

My first thought was that this is more likely to be a spontaneous failure of the windshield glass under pressure, due to manufacturing flaw or improper maintenance. Things like that have certainly happened before. But then again, it seems weird that glass fragments would be projected inward in that scenario.

There are pictures of the outside where you can clearly see impact damage to the top of the window frame.

> it seems weird that glass fragments would be projected inward in that scenario

At speed, I don't know what the outside pressure on the windshield would be, but I'd be surprised if it was lower than the cabin air pressure.

After all, it is called a wind "shield".

Plugging in 35k ft altitude, and 775 ft/s velocity here (https://www.spaceworks.aero/fcc2/index.html) gives dynamic pressure of 220 lb/ft2, vs ~2100 lb/ft2 for 1atm at sea level (the same calculator says 7k ft altitude has a static pressure of ~1600 lb/ft2, or rough idea of cabin air pressure).

The static pressure at 30,000 feet would have to be added in, around 550 lb/ft2, so it looks like the pressure inside is greater than outside.

At that height if windows are damaged enough to hurt captain or pilot, would the flight lose balance because of air coming in? How did they land in that situation? There is no mention of that in the article.

The laminated glass did not fully break. It appears only the inner layer shattered, and cabin pressure was not lost.

It has happened before that cockpit windows have failed at altitude resulting in explosive decompression, and the plane still landed successfully. For example, British Airways Flight 5390:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_5390

Hm, has something been done about the "cannot hear the radio" problem since then?

The airplane shouldn't be affected much by a blown out window. However, the blast in the captain's face might make it very difficult for him to see or even breath. If he could get his oxygen mask on, which I think has goggles, he should be ok.

The article mentions there was no depressurisation, meaning the was no breach of the fuselage/windshield.

Not unless you want to be spontaneously hit by a falling meteorite yourself in some kind of freak accident / suicide scenario.

Well, they do make satellites...