PantaloonFlames

Gauging state of the art against what is available for free or for very cheap per token cost is like gauging the maximum theoretical transport potential by riding a bicycle.

You’re using something that is very energy efficient; you cannot extrapolate that experience to conclude that SOTA models are not doing something much different.

That level of revenue is apparently not enough for them to feel confident in the stability of their competitive position.

The potential of AI may give us the opportunity to graduate to a post-capitalism, or to move to a sort of neo-capitalism, which is governed by different rules.

Capitalism thrives in the realm where there is a scarcity of resources, either physical or informational. Imagine breakthroughs in energy science such that the cost of energy drops to zero, which means the cost of physical resources declines precipitously. Ok so where is the capital now? Must we retain a model based on the premise of scarce physical capital?

It wasn’t the shock of Little Boy that ended the war. That was just a final chapter of a 10+ year journey of horror, despair, and destruction, and the impact of Little Boy cannot be considered outside of that journey.

Europe had been destroyed by June 1945, and yet the empire of Japan continued to fight.

If that pattern holds, a single malicious AI substantially disabling a single world power won’t end the AI race. Participants don’t learn by the defeats of others.

If you’d like to apply a metaphor maybe the 10+ years of world war is more appropriate, after which basically every participant save one was exhausted.

Move to Italy!

I think that was the question: What is the problem it is solving ?

You’ve asserted “THIS is not a solved problem,” which suggests everyone is clear on what THIS means. I think that is not a good assumption.

a slightly different metaphor. Copilot suggests it is next to you, helping you pilot... something else. The computer? The system? But "piloting the LLM" changes the relationship. The LLM is the thing that is being piloted.

The article is confused. The opinion is, it's so much safer _now_ than it was in the 1970s, it makes no sense to restrict children's wanderings.

But the article doesn't consider whether restricting children's wanderings is the REASON it is so much safer for children now.

"We have so many fire-safety rules in the building codes in Seattle. But get this: we haven't had any major fires since 1889! It's obvious we don't need these rules!"

It's true there is a cost to restricting children. But let's be a bit more realistic about the tradeoffs.

Why is iMessage "more conversational" than RCS? and "more human"??

I don't get the distinction you're making. I'm not an expert in mobile messaging so maybe I am missing something obvious.

And what about WhatsApp?

It's too simplistic to imagine the tension is between robot patrol dogs vs automating drudgery. If automating drudgery suddenly puts 30% of people out of work, it has huge broad negative impact on people who are currently alive and working in the current system. Innovate, but do it with awareness.

Are you fairly confident that they’re missing teeth because of drug use? Could it alternatively be caused by lack of access to proper dental care?

Your first counterpoint seems unnecessarily picky.

> So while it is a suitable DSL for many things (it is also seeing new life in web components definition), we are mostly only talking about XML-lookalike language, and not XML proper. If you go XML proper, you need to throw "cheap" out the window.

But the TWE did not embrace all that stuff. It’s not required for its purpose. And to call it “xml lookalike” on that basis seems odd. It’s objectively XML. It doesn’t use every xml feature, but it’s still XML.

It’s as if you’re saying, a school bus isn’t a bus, it’s just a bus-lookalike. Buses can have cup holders and school buses lack cup holders. Therefore a school bus is not really a bus.

I don’t see the validity or the relevance.

Can you give specifics on what Claude code built for you, in the way of missing features ?