>Am I missing something? Why is everyone talking about sandboxes when it comes to OpenClaw
>And now, what, having inference done by Nvidia directly makes it better? Does their hardware prevent an AI from deleting all my emails?
Because other people including Nvidia are mainly focusing on different aspect of data security namely data confidentiality while your main concern are data trustworthy.
Don't conflate between these two otherwise it's difficult to appreciate their respective proposed solutions for example NemoClaw.
>Remember, this is a scripting language, not a compiled language
This is the fundamental issue and "elephant in the room" that everyone is seems to be overlooking, and putting under the carpet.
The extreme compiled type language guys going gung-ho with very slow to compile and complicated Rust (moreso than C++), while the rest of the world gladly hacking their shiny ML/AI codes in scripting language aka Python "the glue duct tapes language" with most if not all the fast engine libraries (e.g PyTorch) written in unsafe C/C++.
The problem is that Python was meant for scripting not properly designed software system engineering. After all it's based on ABC language for beginners with an asterisk attached "intended for teaching or prototyping, but not as a systems-programming language" [1].
In ten years time people will most probably look in horror at their python software stacks tech debt that they have to maintain for the business continuity. Or for their own sanity, they will rewrite the entire things in much more stable with fast development and compiled modern language eco-system like D language with native engine libraries, and seamless integration C, and C++ (to some extend) if necessary.
> In ten years time people will most probably look in horror at their python software stacks tech debt that they have to maintain for the business continuity
> In ten years time people will most probably look in horror at their python software stacks tech debt that they have to maintain for the business continuity.
I regret to inform you that there are _loads_ of multi-decades-old Python stacks at this point.
On the micro level I'll be like "ugh wish I wasn't paying the costs of Python" decently enough. But on the macro level I don't regret Python stacks. At least not when looking at the alternatives.
Tho I will admit I'm a bit mystified at data science stuff in particular persisting in Python. Lots of CPU churn even if the underlying libs are all C extensions.
> The problem is that Python was meant for scripting not properly designed software system engineering.
What something was meant to do has never, ever stopped people. People find creative ways to use tools in unintended ways all the time. It's what we do.
We can call this dumb or get misanthropic about it, or we can try to understand why people all over the world choose to use Python in "weird" ways, and what this tells us about the way people relate to computing.
Why stop at man pages examples, should go all the way to literate programming enabled examples with the help of CUE configs language [1].
Perhaps it's overkill for power users, but most of the users will probably find it handy for the tricky find tool and friends [2].
I think other Unix/Linux users will find the literate programming approach as more useful, intuitive and less error prone ways to complement The Linux Programming Interface book [3].
[1] Cue Does It All, but Can It Literate? (22 comments)
> The LLM makes this easier but the improvement drops to about 2-3x b/c there is a lot of back and forth + me reading the code to confirm etc (yes, another LLM could do some of this but then that needs to get setup correctly etc)
> The back and forth part can be faster if e.g. you have scripts/programs that deterministically check outputs
This is where configuration language like CUE can be useful in complementing LLM [1].
It's the deterministic NLP cousin of the stochastic LLM based on mathematically sound latticed-value logic [2].
>I can't guess what valid use they might have had,other than religious. They seem pointless.
I agreed there are for religious purposes but certainly not pointless for them.
My hypothesis is that it is for their offerings to God, perhaps a fraction from the population fresh produced. In religion like Islam you need to set aside 2.5% of yearly income for charity from farming produces, for example.
These rectangular structures namely Mustatil (rectangle) are very common (over 1000 of them) in built in ancient Arabia and they probably also being used for religious offerings [1]. The location are normally on top of the hills or elavated places similar to this.
Fun facts, Abrahamic religions have common rectangular religious structures. The Kaaba in Mecca was originally in rectangular shape before taking the modern square footprint or iconic cube structure [2]. According to Islamic tradition it's believe to be the first house of worship ever being built in the world by Adam. It's later reconstructed and renovated by Abraham and his son Ishmael.
The ancient Jews during Moses time also has rectangular portable worship structure so-called Tabernacle containing the infamous Ark of the Covenant [3].
Recently in 2025 a unique, 2,800-year-old First Temple-period cultic structure, featuring a 220-square-meter rectangular area, was discovered on the eastern slope of the City of David in Jerusalem. This site includes a ritual altar, a standing stone (masseba), a winepress, and an oil press, indicating significant ritual activity.
The Abrahamic narrative is that everyone started from Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve believe in one single God in the heaven.
Adam was sent down from heaven to the earth, to be the successor (Arabic caliph) to the "one" God. In Semitic language "one" is literal one, not 2 or 3. For example the name Allah in Arabic and Hebrew by definition does not has plural equivalent or gender, like Gods or Goddest.
But overtime by ignorance, people started worshipping idols alongside the original God. These idols were originally in the physical form of pious people. Case in point, Christian "worship" Jesus via Trinity concept invention and, Buddhist worship Buddha idol. It is the job of these later messengers/prophets to remind these ignorant people to worship one true God, some of them have book/kitab/suhuf/scripture from God as guidance. Muslim believe Quran is the last and the only uncorrupted holy scripture remaining.
For muslim, however, Jesus (or most likely Buddha as well), is just another messengers/prophets from the long list of messengers/prophets than ended in Muhammad.
Fun facts all of the main major religious scriptures Hindu, Jewish, Christian, Buddhist has description or prophecy of Muhammad one way or another.
In Jewish tradition it is well known that they are waiting for three prophets at the the time of Jesus (Messiah) arrival, but denied all of them including Muhammad the last one.
Another fun facts, in the science of human genetic it has yhr concept of mythocondrial eve [1]. This is the proof that we human all come and originated from a single parent, regardless of races.
(op, i just realized you might be mentioning things other's believe, and it might not be an opinion of your own. In this case, I'm sorry if i came as too blunt, its just that i come from a background of religious extremist and i'm particularly picky about some things. I can remove it if you wish, but I'd rather take the criticism.)
This reminds me of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong . Its a classic categorization mistake. Its not exactly wrong (its also not right, mind you...), its just non-constructive and almost not worthy of a reply. But since this is a discussion forum, I'll bite.
It judges others on their "ignorance", while embracing it. It talks about religious "narratives" and compares it to belief in the "one true capital G god" (the "real" truthy truth). Meaning it puts one set of beliefs (subjective experiences) above all others, and seems completely unaware of the contradiction while doing so.
It also misunderstands the concept of a mitochondrial Eve. She was not the first, and not the only one alive at the time, she was just the one whose direct lineage survived. Before her there were others. The name "Eve" is doing a lot of work here...
> Fun facts all of the main major religious scriptures Hindu, Jewish, Christian, Buddhist has description or prophecy of Muhammad one way or another.
You mean that $HOLY_BOOK also has a description of the prophecy of the One True Prophet Bob? It must be true, because I'm pretty sure it is.
There's also your point about monotheism.
> overtime by ignorance, people started worshipping idols alongside the original God.
Being someone with a certain admiration for the scientific method, i'm inclined to point out that as far as the history of religion goes (and please correct me about this statement), monotheism seems to be a more recent development (I'm pretty sure hn has people far more qualified than me to add substance here).
My impression is that it's mostly Western secular interpretation while the largest branch of Buddhism and the most predominant in Asia currently is Mahayana where Buddha, or rather Buddhas (as it has many others besides Siddhartha Gautama), are seen as omnipotent spiritual beings with supernatural powers, who are accessible through prayer after apparent death of their human form, which seems close to our traditional concept of deities.
To be fair, it is entirely incorrect about almost everything. I say almost because it deals in dogma, which is usually not even worth discussing, but the other smaller part is "not even wrong".
Care to correct what is/are wrong? By mentioning something are incorrect do not make them incorrect without proof, and the points must be based on the primary scriptures and religious references not whimsical feeling and anecdotal references. I'm merely stating the facts that I gathered and understood based on my acquired knowledge. Admittedly, I can be wrong on these matters but not until it's proven.
While waiting for your forthcoming answers, allow me to guess one of the contentions, if I may. Based on my comments, it will be that the Jews were awaiting for these three prophesized prophets at the time of Jesus arrival based originally on the Old Testament. Based on the Quran and muslim tradition, the two of them are Jesus the Messiah (literally Christ or Christos in Greek, or the Annointed One in English), and the other is "prophet similar to Moses" namely the final messenger/prophet Muhammad.
These are the verses from the Bible New Testament recording that the Jews around the time of Jesus arrival were actively waiting for these three prophesized prophets [1].
"(19) And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?
(20) And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ.
(21) And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No."
Based on Jewish scripture and also the Old Testament (Deutronomy 18), the latter or the third prophesized prophet is similar in profiles and characters to Moses [2].
Muhammad fits this very description like a glove, since both Moses and Muhammad are very similar.
They both:
1) triumphed over their enemies
2) performed migration/exodus/hijrah
3) died not in the birthplace
4) died natural deaths
5) got married
6) had children
7) led their people
8) established new laws (Sharia)
9) engaged in warfare
10) became prophet at around 40 years old, etc
It's not very clear from the New Testament but in the original Jewish scripture the verse mentioned "brethren of the Israelites" - as a reference to Muhammad, who is a descendant of Ishmael (brother of Isaac/ancestor of Israelites). Please note that from the Torah part of the Tanakh, the provided interpretation of the word "brethren" is from fellow Israelites (but not the verse itself) [3].
The Dead Dea Scrolls version of these verses provided by the following translations [4]. Interestingly there are 30 physical copies of the Deuteronomy in the collection, and apparently it is one of the very popular chapters hidden inside the caves of Qumran.
"(18) I will raise them up a prophet from among their brothers, like you. I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I shall command him.
(19) It shall happen, that whoever will not listen to my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him"
Fun facts, Muhammad is an illiterate person, he cannot read and only recite the Quran exactly as conveyed verbatim to him from the God via the the archangel Gabriel.
Another fun facts, every chapters in the Quran (except Surah At-Tawbah) begin in the God's name or Bismillah ("In the name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful").
Another extra fun facts, Moses by far is the most frequently mentioned name in the Quran (136), and Jesus or Isa appeared only 25 times. Please note that Isa is the actual Aramaic/Arabic name of Jesus since letter J is the a medieval Latin invention not present in ancient or modern Greek. But if we include Jesus other names referred in the Quran in addition to Isa, namely Ibn Maryam (son of Maryam) and Al-Masih (The Messiah or Christ), it will be tied second with Abraham at 69.
It's really inevitable isn't it, we are going from RAG to PAG, or physical augmented generation.
We already have PINN or physics-informed neural networks [1]. Soon we are going to have physical field computing by complex-valued network quantization or CVNN that has been recently proposed for more efficient physical AI [2].
Perhaps any new language targetting GPU acceleration would consider TILE based concept and primitive recently supported by major GPU vendors including Nvidia [1],[2],[3],[4].
For more generic GPU targets there's TRITON [5],[6].
[1] NVIDIA CUDA 13.1 Powers Next-Gen GPU Programming with NVIDIA CUDA Tile and Performance Gains:
Not sure if the author know about CUE, here's the HN post from early this year on literate programming with CUE [1].
CUE is based of value-latticed logic that's LLM's NLP cousin but deterministic rather than stochastic [2].
LLMs are notoriously prone to generating syntactically valid but semantically broken configurations thus it should be used with CUE for improving literate programming for configs and guardrailing [3].
[1] CUE Does It All, But Can It Literate? (22 comments)
>And now, what, having inference done by Nvidia directly makes it better? Does their hardware prevent an AI from deleting all my emails?
Because other people including Nvidia are mainly focusing on different aspect of data security namely data confidentiality while your main concern are data trustworthy.
Don't conflate between these two otherwise it's difficult to appreciate their respective proposed solutions for example NemoClaw.
reply