andrewjneumann

I get needing to price more, but it really feels like a slow shift to M&A, when they couple it with license changes and “case by case basis” to make it back to OSS.

I’m not sure why growth at all costs needs to be the business model for every company?… make a great product, if you need to charge more over time cool, but don’t rug pull.

Agree. It’s early stages, but I love the approach!

tl;dr right problem, wrong solution.

An essay exploring what happens to human society, economics, and purpose when self-improving AI and advanced robotics eliminate many physical and material constraints.

Happy to have a thoughtful conversation!

They keep writing like they stand to profit from this or something. Too many “coulds” in there for me too, this could be an amazing advancement and it could be nothing… normally we look at data and last headline I saw was 25 “high” vulnerabilities at the cost of $1 million in tokens.

No comparison to human teams, and I’m sure that $1 million in tokens was used by humans, in a team. So like most AI, they’ve developed a tool that capable people can use to be better, but unlike most tools, they’re claiming this to be outright magic. The magic is the hype train.

Google Enterprise accounts are sunsetting AI Ultra in favor of consumption based pricing at the end of the month. It’s unclear how limits for AI Ultra might change for gmail users. Flash3.5 is much better at coding, but also more expensive the pervious flash models.

So much for AI getting cheaper.

It never ceases to amaze me how such poor management can exist, and how such a large company with people who depend on them can simply just not exist overnight. I only did they file for bankruptcy twice, they somehow completely ran out of money overnight?

Well, all the people who had future booked tickets get a refund?