Sysreq2

This is what I was expecting. Very much appreciated. OP’s paper is good - but I sort of feel like it’s singing to the choir. It’s a great resource if you already know the material.

They are most certainly not. It suffers from the nude beach paradox: Anyone who wants you to see them naked, is not someone you want to see naked.

I will say the more recent additions to C++ at least have solved many of my long standing issues with that C-variant. Most of it was stuff that was long overdue. Like string formatting or a thread safe println. But even some of the stuff I didn’t think I would love has been amazing. Modules. Modules bro. Game changer. I’m all in. Honestly C++ is my go to for anything that isn’t just throw away again. Python will always be king of the single use scripts.

Right but until Congress raises the debt ceiling, the Executive Branch has an empty wallet and maxed out credit card. Funding doesn’t go out all at once either. Some programs don’t start until later in the year for example. They typically aim to distribute 1/12th of the yearly allowance per month. Sometimes agencies will over spend early and have to be austere later (like FEMA last year).

Appropriations is Congressional and specifics how much an agency will get over the fiscal year.

Apportionment is under the Executive and addresses when and how those funds are made available.

They are two distinct things.

Considering DOGE is ~100 people and the American labor force is 168 million, in your example, I would be willing to expend 0.000000675% of my time and energy to save 14 cents. That’s the difference between saying keep the change or putting it in my pocket.

Before anyone asks, no I don’t round up for the Boys and Girls Club at Taco Bell. I sometimes feel bad about it though.

I keep harping on this - but two points:

1) Our debt is above GDP and interest is rising faster than GDP growth. Debt is fine when being used as leverage but we are upside down at the moment.

2) We don’t have the ability to issue more debt at the moment. The government has no money. They are using employee pension funds to meet obligations with a promissory note. We have negative cash flow and have run out of the ability to extend our line of credit until Congress raises the debt ceiling.

A lot of people are talking about tool use and writing internal scripts, and yeah, that’s kind of an answer. Really though I think the author is highlighting that LLMs are not being used efficiently at the present moment.

LLMs are great at certain tasks. Databases are better at certain tasks. Calculators too. While we could continually throw more and more compute at the problem, growing layers and injecting more data, wouldn’t it make more sense to just have an LLM call its own back-end calculator agent? When I ask it for obscure information maybe it should just pull from it’s own internal encyclopedia database.

Let LLMs do what they do well, but let’s not forget the decades that brought us here. Even the smartest human still uses a calculator, so why doesn’t an AI? The fact that it writes its own JavaScript is flashy as hell but also completely unnecessary and error prone.

SpaceX and by extension Starship are critical for the entire western space industry. Last year SpaceX was responsible for something like 90% of the stuff sent up. Then China and then Russia. There is simply no one else in even in the market right now. SpaceX has lowered costs by an order of magnitude already and hopes Starship will drop it by another.

If you don’t like Elon Musk that’s fine. But his companies get stuff done. Blue Origin has been around longer, has gotten more from the government (Yeah, really) and been getting a billion a year from Bezos with nothing to show for it. It’s insane how much SpaceX has done while everyone else has been doing nothing.

Guys, I’m gonna stop this before it gets out of hand: All we need is love and a shit ton of compute.

Everything else is just details.

So it’s funny you mention that. I actually think Marx made a fantastic critique of capitalism. He kind of nailed the inherent flaws within the system. I compare his solutions to someone predicting that every desk would eventually have a telegraph through. Identifying a problem doesn’t therefor imply a solution.

Regarding the modern Progressive movement though, I find them a bit too authoritarian for my tastes. There are countless examples but classic Western liberalism is at odds with their ideology. They’ve fallen into the classic revolutionary entrapment of their own power being tied with continued upheaval. If you are not with them completely then you are the enemy. From the Google Manifesto to JK Rowling’s cancelling, they remind me of the mob during the French Revolution. They just eat their own and refuse to accept any kind of meaningful critique.

Liberalism requires debate, disagreement and questioning the status quo. I don’t see that amongst the modern Progressives. They would rather burn it down than build something better.

Ironically, I fear them gaining power as much as I do the religious right. Neither contains the capacity for building the coalitions needed for stable governance. I like moderates. Stability. Peace. Compromise. Mutual Respect. Empathy. I just don’t see those values in those circles.

Now that I’ve politely disagreed, I suppose it’s just a matter of time before someone comes along to insult me and prove my point.

I don’t think the modern Democratic Party the same pro-worker, anti-corporate greed version a lot of us grew up with. Don’t take this as an endorsement for Trump mind you. Hardly. Democrats still have basic human rights on their side.

Corporate greed and military spending aren’t up for debate though. We can bicker about guns and immigration policy all we want but some topics aren’t even on the table for discussion.

I don’t think mass adoption is their goal. They had a problem. They solved that problem. They shared how they solved said problem.

Every engineering company releases stuff like this. It’s not meant to change the world. It’s marketing to recruit other engineers who would find that problem interesting.

We’ve been here before: you can’t punish someone into being your consumer. Someone who wants your product at the price you offer it will ultimately pay for it. Short sighted business decisions ultimately hurt the industry more than accepting the need to change your business model.