I can't really understand what you're describing. You have form on left & results on right, but you're requesting the new form state & re-rendering the form HTML on each request? Why? My naive understanding is that you could use something like hx-target to have the response to the form submissions update only the results area & the form should not need rerendered at all.

Why does the form need rerendered on a per request basis? HTML/Browser already tracks the current form state.

Because the form changed based on the selections you made. Like facet search.

Say you have a clothing store listing page and you filter for only "Shirts". Well, the filter that has "Material" might remove (or disable) the option for "Denim" because that is only for "Pants". So that state needs to be computed some where. My thought was, "Ok, refetch the whole thing with the updated options within the form (disable options that can’t be combined together) + the product results for those filters". But that was just a lot of HTML to ask for after each change.

So decoupling it so that the form never refetched, just the results, made it a lot snappier. But you still have the form state issue where you want to update the options based on selections. So the form became a little Alpine data component and the results stayed as an HTML partial.

Did you try out-of-bound swap (oob) in HTMX? With that you can update any element on page, e.g. three different form elements changed due to <select> change, request returns only these three form elements with oob selectors and keep the rest of the form intact.

https://htmx.org/attributes/hx-swap-oob/

Ah OK, so you had a level of dynamic behaviour in the form itself that warranted an applet/data component for the form. I can see how HTMX would not help with that.

> That eliminates margin for corruption and lenience.

Lenience and mercy are critical components of a system of a just criminal justice system. We have judges issue sentences in large part because we want a human being with good judgement to decide how serious the punishment for an offence should be based on the circumstances.

A person who shoots their partner who has been abusing them for years should probably receive a different punishment than a person who pulls out a gun in traffic and shoots someone for cutting them off. Mercy or "lenience" are not inherently flaws in the justice system, though of course there's always "too much of a good thing."

a hundred dollars a year for this?? What does the service even do with that money? I pay this for 20 years so you can share a google doc upon my demise?

I must be missing something.

"The decision stems directly from growing official concern over the potential misuse of classified information linked to national security."

What are the specific concerns?

As the contracts are going to a chinese company. The officials making the decisions likely like their bribes wery much.

I imagine that’s classified.

People in the comments here are praising the move, so presumably something is public. I've googled but I can't see some specific breach or documented misuse. Is the objection to Palantir strictly political?

> Is the objection to Palantir strictly political?

I'd say they are mostly moral.

There's been a lot of recent scandals going public against the social democratic party ruling on spain now (PSOE) and its previous dirigents. See Zapatero case. leaked by US agencies recently once Spain put some kind of friction to the Rota south spain bases getting involved on anything vs Iran.

The president P. Sanchez, has been clearly antagonizing Trump in these and other intl issues (even if only visible in spain, as he is not that relevant internationally, etc)

But anyways, this seems like deepstate fighting vs current US admin and current Spain admin, one can infer "Palantir" is basically a gag order away from giving the US govt anything it wants, so as an antagonist. to its current admin, it seems smart to avoid having them as critical providers.

why choose china? Makes no sense, but probably the only other big bro Spain can rely on if the US isn't it anymore

OK so this is not specific to Palantir, but about entrusting sensitive Spanish data to any US based company. If so, that makes sense.

well it could be limited to companies who are entirely dedicated to surveillance and massive data collection on citizens like palantir. particularly with that and how ideology based palantir appears to be.

i’m sure they wouldn’t be nearly as concerned about a US company that manufactured screwdrivers or nike or something similar.

"You can't criticize lobbying unless you can name all the more active lobbyists" is a very strange concept. Have you thought this one all the way through?

> The question worth asking is why are people obsessed with demonizing the AIPAC in particular and singling it out as the one or primary 'evil lobbying group'

Is your assertion that no one is allowed to criticize AIPAC unless they can 'prove' to you that others who spend more than them are not somehow worse?

No, I'm saying people obsessed with AIPAC to the exclusion of all other lobbying groups are not motivated primarily by an objection to lobbying.

I'm also saying the narrative that "AIPAC controls the gov't via lobbying" which many people believe is incoherent because Coinbase must control the gov't even more by this thinking.

If you think people aren't obsessed with AIPAC you are not following US politics.

> If you think people aren't obsessed with AIPAC you are not following US politics.

I think a simpler explanation might be just that there is a lot of attention being paid to why the US seems beholden to Israel to the extent that it would be willing to risk it's relationship with other allies that provide far more in return.

Exhibit A is the Iran war where the US essentially abandoned it's middle east and far east allies (to the extent to moving interceptors from Korea and Japan) to defend Israel. Other regional allies were largely left to fend for themselves.

Seeing all this, people are legitimately asking, what exactly does the US get in return for the enormous support, both direct and indirect that it provides to Israel. Given it's role, naturally AIPAC is going to be central to these conversations.

And specifically agreeing to a war, which every single president before has said "fuck no" because they understood the wider ramifications.

Fun fact: Not a single Kia vehicle sold in Finland has had a tow hook in it for 6 months - they're ALL stuck in Hormuz.

> the US seems beholden to Israel

Can you explain how Trump's MoU fits into this "beholden to Israel" model? This deal goes directly against Israel's interests and wishes.

Biden forced Israel to stay their hand during their war with Hamas, for example telling them not to go into Rafah, which delayed them for some time. So is Israel controlled by the US, or is it the other way around? (When they did go into Rafah, they found both Israeli hostages and Hamas leadership, proving that Biden was wrong for telling them not to take the fight there.)

How many of those other groups have openly lobbied for war? I have no doubt there are a few others TBH. The oil industry comes to mind.

The point being, it's not just the amount of money at play. That's only part of it. But you know that.

Maybe people focus on AIPAC because they have a problem with any or all of the other bullet points I mentioned that AIPAC supports and enables and that your whole long message never addressed?

AIPAC is also the unique lobbying group that effectively threatens US congressfolk on X. After Massie lost, they went ahead and boasted that "elected officials are free to disagree with us, but only briefly". They deleted that post after extensive outrage, then said it was "fake" a few weeks later. But way too many independent people across the entire political spectrum took screenshots of that timeline.

AIPAC is just the most well-known and representative entity in a large constellation of a hostile foreign lobby that has somehow avoided accountability under FARA.

Qatar didn't spend 9 figures getting Trump elected, but an Israeli gambling magnate did.

AIPAC is not foreign, this is another misconception/lie. AIPAC is an American lobby funded by Americans.

Everybody knows which country AIPAC is loyal to, and it's not the USA. The bad faith arguments undermine your hasbara.

The butwhatabout-ism is strong with this one...

So they're getting their moneys worth.

This is a great example of perpetual victimhood of Zionists.

I was wondering if I was crazy for thinking "how is what he's suggesting different than just putting that 'class' into a hook function?" I'm glad to see someone already wrote it up, kudos.

@OP: PEBKAC, respectfully.

Not clear how an LLM is going to prevent a bomb from being put in a custom-built pager, or why Anthropic should object to Israel waging war against a militia whose goal it is to destroy that country.

Because they use LLMs to “intelligence-wash” targeting civilians, and murdered children by blowing up pagers in public areas (what you called “waging war against a militia”).

Operating an armed group out of civilian areas is not “one weird trick” that makes you immune from attacks. It means you are endangering the civilians around you by putting them in harms way.

No war has ever been waged without civilian casualties, Israel is the only country held to this standard. “Thousands” of Hezbollah pagers were exploded and there were apparently 2 children killed. This is a tragedy as is every civilian death, but that’s pretty amazingly targeted and an extremely low civilian death toll for thousands of bombs.

For contrast, Hezbollah fired one single rocket and killed 12 children: https://www.timesofisrael.com/a-dark-day-for-majdal-shams-dr...

Ceasefires are not in place until they are in place. Before they are in place, war is still ongoing. Discussing a ceasefire does not mean there is a ceasefire currently.

Though I agree with the author & use the web version of various applications, there is another side to this. The author says s/he uses plugins to disable ads and so on. If its an ad supported site for which one does not pay, this is tantamount to expecting the provider to run the service for no compensation/revenue at all.

Furthermore, to say platform owners don't care about offending such users would be an understatement: platform owners likely want to actively repel such users. Why serve someone who neither pays a fee nor agrees to be shown ads?

Struggling to understand what this is or how it works.

Did you have a look at the intro in the manual? https://antithesishq.github.io/bombadil/1-introduction.html

If that's not clear, please let me know how we can improve it!

"Bombadil is property-based testing for web UIs, autonomously exploring and validating correctness properties, finding harder bugs earlier."

I can't make heads or tails of this. What does it do? "Bombadil checks each property as it explores your system in its chaotic ways, reporting back any violations." what properties? checks how? does it read application state? "recording violations" what violations? "select an action and performs it" what actions?

This needs some code example, or a video, or something to explain what this tool is

The page "Language features > Properties" starts to explain what this is.

A hello-world example of what it looks like, and what running it would validate, would be nice.

It's all very abstractly described in the README and that intro page you linked.

Fair enough! I'm probably doing a demo video that'd help with this. Maybe can condense that in text form into the readme as well.

> Bombadil itself decides what is an interesting event and when to capture state.

It would be very nice to have a little more details on how this works. Though I guess we can figure it out via code/trialing it out.

I'll give it a go later today!

Go for it! I've been meaning to do an "architecture of Bombadil" blog post that'd likely answer this question. It's not super advanced by any means, but it's a mindset shift to how you might think about browser testing coming from the mainstream frameworks like Playwright.