Hi HN! I'm the author of this service. Thank you for your support.
There may have been some temporary downtime due to residential proxy running out of bandwidth. I have purchased additional bandwidth. (I run this service for free.)
There also may be some errors with particular videos because they are not accessible in certain regions. For now all requests to YouTube originate from United States, but open to change in the future to some kind of round-robin or fallback system.
I know it's not perfect. I developed the tool originally for my own use. It's open source and I'm open to any patches or pull requests.
Hey this is really cool, I literally had the same idea about a month ago but ultimately decided to not pursue it. Glad someone else did.
A few quick Qs -
1) Do you use the available auto-generated transcripts from youtube? Or do you do any audio parsing? I know transcripts aren't always available.
2) Do you have any plans to monetize in some way, do you think it would be possible? It's definitely a neat product but a tad generic and replicable, so I'm curious.
1.) We do no TTS of our own. We either use the original transcripts uploaded manually by the YouTuber or we use the auto-generated ones supplied by Google.
2.) No, I plan to keep it free as the operational costs are relatively minimal.
Thanks for your response. Yeah that's nice and simple. I wonder how much you'll burn keeping it up for free, are we talking like on the order of $20/mo? If you use models like 4o-mini it might even be less, that thing is insanely cheap and not terrible. Cheers
Thank you for the article! I found the "I understand computers and therefore the world" in the beginning a bit pretentious, but after reading the rest anyway, it doesn't anymore. I'd summarize the piece as:
"The hacker mindset comes with powerful tools: The urge to figure stuff out, the creativity to use it in unusual ways and the passion to share knowledge. Let's use it to make the world a better place. Start a company and gather allies. If enough of us do this, we'll have an impact on the world."
Yep. I know this is probably a bit revisionist (old-timey inventors wanted to get rich quick too) but it feels like companies used to more often be geared toward longevity, not ascendance, and I don't see how they could achieve longevity while constantly trying to make shareholders rich. Longevity really should be up there on the list of goals, with security and prosperity for all those involved.
I suppose a meat grinder growfast company could invent world-improving products that justify employee churn and abuse, but those would be unicorns with diamond encrusted horns.
What is the point of any of our actions if they don't benefit people?
The story of GE under Jack Welch and his underlings that spread out from there is horrifying. Boeing got caught up in it with the MD reverse acquisition. There was an audiobook I listened to recently that covered a bunch of this but I can't for the life of me find the title right now.
The idea is to focus on creating value that fits your morals and values, not just to focus on “creating value for VCs” which is what usually begets the “scale at all costs” conversation that has been so popular during the ZIRP we’ve lived through.
We work across all major ecosystems and platforms. Our specializations include EVM, Cosmos, Solana, Move (Aptos/Sui), and L1 code as well. We're a full-service provider and can do anything from auditing ZK circuits to web frontends to hardware wallet firmware. Clients include LayerZero, Solana Foundation, Aptos Labs, Sui Foundation, Starkware, Jump.
Me and my cofounder also previously founded the #1 CTF team in the world, perfect blue. In general our talent is top-notch, we exclusively recruit and retain the world's top hackers.
Right. The challenge is written incorrectly on purpose, otherwise the code isn't vulnerable. The use of volatile is a bit of a misdirection for the CTF players, since you're right that it's a common misconception that volatile acts like a barrier.
> You cannot write a single-writer, single-reader FIFO on modern processors without the use of memory barriers.
I am not sure about this. From my understanding, on x86, given the absence of compiler reordering, processor reordering should not cause a problem for a single-reader-single-writer FIFO. Normally I just use atomics but I think in this specific instance it should still be okay anyways. Obviously it will not work on ARM.
From my testing if you compile the code on x86 with clang or gcc, the resulting binary is not vulnerable.
