avinoth

Probably too much of the training data that has Magic wands were from a video game.

Because humans have basic needs like food, shelter and they can be put it jail. And they have loyalty, patriotism, feel part of the society. Those threats & incentives have made it for a good society to function so far.

I think that line is getting blurrier by the day with the current administration. The companies very quickly fell in line before even any consequence of note. Donations to the ballroom, calling it super intelligence, renaming the gulf, etc.

Would you really trust that OpenAI wouldn't skew the results to tend to a certain way or that Grok will always be neutral in how it operates?

From a third world, there was a time when US products & companies were more trustworthy, I agree. But, there has been enough display from these Cos to show that they have lost that badge.

But in Twitter or Facebook, the complexity is not in the app but with the scale. How do you support the network, graph, querying, fetching, etc. That is not the case for a self-contained binary like Claude code CLI that talks to the same API irrespective of 100 people are using or 1M people are using around the world.

I don't think it does either, but it's surely overvalued and have to sustain it's ridiculously high forward P/E. Hence the semi-regular news about FSD, TeslaCab, Optimus Bots, and now Flying cars. Seems it's working. It's always priced in with the "potential future".

Yeah, true. It’s sad to see the Market forces being nothing more than a whimper on these massive untenable mergers.

Exactly. What they’re doing, repeatedly, is setting a narrative that this is how software engineering should be. Always be reliant on tokens. Don’t worry about uptime or errors - agents can address it, don’t worry about security - agents can address it, don’t worry about code comprehension - agents will always be there for you.

This is like one of Google’s infrastructure blog. Google scale things are only relevant and appropriate for them. We had lots of bitter lessons from smaller engineering teams following the process with the justification that “this is how Google does it”.

Similarly, Anthropic can afford to do this because they have virtually unlimited tokens and labs to train models for their specific usecase. The rest of us need code comprehension lest we become dependent on continuous supply of tokens (which is a state these labs badly want to achieve)

So, unless you work at a lab, or have unlimited tokens guaranteed through the life of your company, it would do both the company and you good to continue to read the code and not let these 30k PRs per engineer be the norm.

An excerpt from the article makes my point

> Nobody on the team keeps a complete mental model of Claude Code in their head, and we don't think anyone needs to. When someone wants to understand a part of the codebase, they ask Claude to write an explainer for exactly that slice. It takes minutes and reflects the code as it is today.

Mark my words, these thrusters and flying car stunts will eventually be used as a justification to merge Tesla into SpaceX, the same way how they justified space datacenter to merge X.ai onto SpaceX.

There was optimus robots already on Tesla side and inference / r&d funded by x.ai (now spacex).

One thing I've observed Gemini being the best is in the context of non-western stuff. Like, when I ask about obscure srilankan food, or chat about Indian/Tamil movies or songs, Religious customs & beliefs, Gemini almost always answers accurately and very close to how helpful they are in Anglosphere related topics. ChatGPT also does do a bit better recently, but Claude/Grok are absolute trash on those fronts.

Google's years of research project into Indic scripts, image trainings, translation efforts & transliteration efforts is literally paying off. The AI adoption from non-English, non-Chinese population will only if you have these contextual localisations, which I think Gemini is poised to do well.

For example, you can ask for a shopping list for a marriage function in a town from Tamil nadu (the marriage custom varies by districts), and Gemini provides contextual and helpful answer (like what is the custom followed there, what is gifted traditionally, etc), whereas if you ask Claude/ChatGPT, it talks about marriage registeries or pretty generalised answers which is not relevant or useful.

Is it only me or is the changing background disturbing for others as well? Maybe it's my ADD brain finding the hook, but it takes the focus away from the content whenever it shifted.

The quickest sign I have right now to find if the developer/team don't read their code is looking at their recently AI-generated test cases. Often, coding agents go too verbose in their tests and they are most often overlooked even during normal reviews. If there are verbose tests, like declaring a constant and asserting it's value, you know that the code isn't being read much.