gipp

> You can look at the recent Hudson Yards development. Largely owned by two companies, Related and Oxford Properties, the development is quite pleasant.

You're using Hudson Yards as a positive development example? It's broadly hated for pretty much exactly the kind of large-scale developer homogenization discussed in the article.

> You can easily go to NYC and find entire neighborhoods owned by large absentee landlords and yet are still walkable and desirable to live in.

Sure, because they were largely built a hundred years ago, and parceled into lots a hundred more before that, and because NYC remains uniquely friendly to continued mixed-use development today.

As dumb as the renaming is to begin with, it feels like making this your hill to die on would also be pretty dumb, no? It's fairly inconsequential in the end.

"Reproduce an existing piece of software" doesn't seem like a problem that generalizes well to "develop a new piece of software," for a fair number of reasons.

Huh? You seem to think the author, or maybe I, have some strong stance in favor of the status quo on conservationism, which is not the case. The article is just about trying to understand why the movement has been so successful, and what would have to change to get past it.

It's not "word games" because they're two different movements, with two different sets of causes and therefore two different sets of needs to be addressed.

A whole lot of people in the comments who clearly didn't read the article, given the great lengths the author went to to distinguish NIMBYism (which most of the comments are about) from "NITBYism," i.e. historic conservationism which the article is actually about. Most of the objections being raised here are also points made in the article.

Of course all that's undermined by the choice to use NIMBY in the headline, which is perplexing.

I don't think the GP had anything to do with the language change itself. More that it marks a clear point of Anthropic taking ownership and governance of the project in a less open direction.

As I and several other people pointed out last time this was posted, "A is B," in natural language, does not imply "B is A." "Is" can denote any of many different shades of relationship weaker than logical identity.

This has very quickly become an uninteresting, and often even unconvincing critique. Especially on this site where it is levelled at essentially every blog post submitted.

Maybe true, maybe not. If it actually says something, which this one does, I just don't care. And I'm hardly an AI cheerleader

> As has been mentioned the goal was a port so they "could" eventually rewrite most of it to be idiomatic rust.

They may have said that, but quite clearly the value they actually get out of it is getting the headline "AI reimplements complex, broadly used software in 2 weeks, but makes it way better because it's rust now" in front of a million people's eyes, only 1% of whom will ever find out it was mostly fluff

When we're talking lab revenue, we're taking what companies are spending on AI.

The question is not whether companies are investing in AI, it's whether they're getting anything in return. Or, whether execs are just as anxious and confused about the story being sold as everyone else, taking the ludicrous amount of capital being put behind it as evidence that there's a "there" there, and hopping on the train out of pure FOMO and hedging, whether they're actually getting anything out of it at all.

For everyone but the individual account holders (who have ~no voice in this market) the opacity of the trusts is a selling point, isn't it?

I'm not sure what's different about my setup (just a Vaultwarden deployment hosted behind Tailscale, connected using the official Chrome extension and Android app), but I've never once encountered the long unlock delays due to sync attempts. It's always unlocked instantly. And the app is frequently unable to connect since I'm not always on the tablet.

Buddy... The whole point of the post is that he wants his students to question whether "succeeding in this market" is really the right choice.