adwf

Wouldn't be surprised if this sort of backwards compatibility is an absolute goldmine for AI assisted vulnerability searches. Would place bets on MS having to remove some significant fraction of all this in the coming years.

I imagine it's the same foundation model on the 4 series, with Fable 5/Mythos being a new or upgraded foundation model. Then the point releases are fine-tuning plus post-training alignment with desired outcomes. The "thinking" can involve multiple steps, eg. asking the model first what it thinks the user wants to do, why it wants to do it, rewriting the prompt to generate better outcomes, how it should do it, come up with a plan, etc. So when they announce each point release like Opus 4.8, they're probably adding new layers of thinking to try and get good results on benchmarks. And that of course has cost and speed implications.

Then Sonnet/Haiku are just attempts to quantise/distil down to an acceptable performance/cost ratio. The cynic in me says we probably won't see any more of those until post-IPO, keep people addicted to the most costly models to pump a quarter or two of revenue figures, unless a competitor starts seriously undercutting them on price/performance. Hence the recent requests to slow down model training worldwide with their competitors.

Of course it could be that Fable "5" is just a marketing bump to the version, not a new foundation model...

This looks wonderful! After playing Cities Skylines 2 for the last week, all I can say is that as long as you have a half-decent traffic system, I'll be happy!

Plus the SUV is usually point-to-point, leave home, go to work, come back. Whereas the bus is going back and forth ten times per day.

In Europe, the numbers differ even more. Lighter weight cars typically 1.5-2 tons, a new London bus can be upto 18 tons when loaded - that's ~5-16 units of wear for the car to 104,976 units for the bus...

But this is all supposing we're optimising for road wear, which isn't really the point of a bus system.

I work on ML problems in the healthcare/life sciences area, anything that enhances explainability is helpful. To a regulator, it's not really good enough to point at a black box and say you don't know why it gave the wrong answer this time. They have an odd acceptance of human error, but very little for technological uncertainty.

Oh god, the bad mocks are the worst. Try adding instructions not to make mocks and it creates "placeholders", ask it to not create mocks or placeholders and it creates "stubs". Drives me mad...

To add to this list:

- Duplicate functions when you've asked for a slight change of functionality (eg. write_to_database and write_to_database_with_cache), never actually updating all the calls to the old function so you have a split codebase.

- On a similar vein, the backup code path of "else: do a stupid static default" instead of erroring, which would be much more helpful for debugging.

- Strong desires to follow architecture choices it was trained on, regardless of instruction. It might have been trained on some presumably high quality, large and enterprise-y codebases, but I'm just trying to write a short little throwaway program which doesn't need the complexity. KISS seems anathema to coding agents.

Not agreeing or disagreeing with your point, just adding info for context:

Fortnite: July 25, 2017 (Battle Royale mode launched September 26, 2017)

Apex Legends: February 4, 2019

Valorant: June 2, 2020

Overwatch: May 24, 2016

Call of Duty: 2003, Annual release

League of Legends: October 27, 2009

Dota 2: July 9, 2013

Roblox: 2006 (initially as DynaBlocks, rebranded to Roblox the same year)

Blame Claude 4 if any date is wrong...

In the UK and a few other countries (Norway, Hungary, Canada, ???), EVs will have a green "flash" on the number plate. Makes it a bit easier to identify!

Forgive me if I find it somewhat difficult to take seriously an argument by a person judging progress on the Kardashev scale...

You could pick some slightly less sci-fi measures like "number of trivially preventable deaths from diseases for which we have vaccines", for example.

> Where did I mention being an amazing programmer?

I mean... that's what the title and context of the discussion thread is all about?

Because an autistic person can be an amazing programmer? As could a blind person, a deaf person, etc...

Simple accommodations can be made if needed and then there's no need to exclude people on old-fashioned prejudice.

In the specific case here, 7z is your friend for all zips and compressed files in general, not sure I've ever used unzip on Linux.

Related to that, the Unix philosophy of simple tools that do one job and do it well, also applies here a bit. More typical workflow would be a utility to tarball something, then another utility to gzip it, then finally another to encrypt it. Leading to file extensions like .tar.gz.pgp, all from piping commands together.

As for versioning, I'm not entirely sure why your Debian and Ubuntu installs both claim version 6.00, but that's not typical. If this is for a personal machine, I might recommend switching to a rolling release distro like Arch or Manjaro, which at least give upto date packages on a consistent basis, tracking the upstream version. However, this does come with it's own set of maintenance issues and increased expectation of managing it all yourself.

My usual bugbear complaint about Linux (or rather OSS) versioning is that people are far too reluctant to declare v1.00 of their library. Leading to major useful libraries and programs being embedded in the ecosystem, but only reaching something like v0.2 or v0.68 and staying that way for years on end, which can be confusing for people just starting out in the Linux world. They are usually very stable and almost feature complete, but because they aren't finished to perfection according to the original design, people hold off on that final v1 declaration.

Seems to me like many research institutions, but well funded, attracting great talent and able to operate for a long timescale - they asked a lot of wrong questions too and we just highlight the great ones.