staticman2

> If you fire that dev, who do you think will use Claude?

The remaining 10% of devs that I don't fire. How much software do I really need?

Anyway, I know there are some flaws in my argument, it was just a thought experiment.

I'm being sarcastic as to the specifics but didn't productivity go down 199k because the 200k engineer is now replaceable with a 1k subscription and will soon be fired?

Literally the output of the labor dropped to almost zero value?

I have not explored this but If I wanted Claude Code to make a spiritual successor to Punch Out I would first have it clone Punch Out to see if it was capable of doing this, then if it worked I'd start changing the assets and mechanics one idea at a time until I had something with more novelty behind it.

If you uploaded the audio via the web site or app and got terrible results I'd bet Argon wasn't the model doing the transcribing. The only way to know for sure is to try again with the API.

Or you failed to understand how the blog post using the eye of Sauron metaphor was cartoonishly misunderstanding the world we live in. Who can say?

It sounds to me like he wants you to believe the effective way to lobby for a ban on open source A.I. development is to use the same "classic" methods that someone in the 1950s used to lobby for coffee beans.

Therefore, as they are not acting like 1950s coffee bean sellers, they can't be doing regulatory capture.

That's the only possibly explanation why they don't lobby like coffee bean sellers.

These industries and eras are completely interchangeable.

It's not regulatory capture because look over here: I've invented a new term "classic regulatory capture" which involves only those historical incidents that are not like this.

This is by definition not "classic regulatory capture" a term that I have borrowed to cover things that are not this.

Whenever someone brings up "regulatory capture" I shall change the topic to "classic regulatory capture" which by definition cannot be this.

Very interesting quote.

> Google currently has the most generous usage limits on their $20 plan among US providers, so it's a pretty good deal.

Are you saying when you use Argon in antigravity it has generous token usage? I forget if I tried it with antigravity but my experience with using it as a chat bot was the usage limit was terrible.

Yeah this was hard to navigate on my phone but what I saw on my phone didn't look "stunning".

Every A.I. related post here has someone saying "I for one see no difference between a human being and an A.I." but this may be the first time I've seen this cliche extended to "How bizarre to meet a human being that thinks humans are not identical to A.I."

As I understood it the less wrong people think the A.I. will likely rapidly cause human extinction.

I'm not familiar with/ wasn't familiar with any "economic" phases of the less wrong lore.

My comment had nothing to do with the economy. I was finding humor at the visual of a guy with authority over an actual existential threat (nuclear arsenal) being told the lesswrong lore about graphic cards in data centers being far more dangerous to humanity, and presumably, thinking the less wrong guy has something wrong with him.

I can't imagine why someone with control of a nuclear arsenal wasn't wetting his pants over the existential risk of graphic cards.

Why do you expect it to crash before the OpenAI IPO?

> Anthropic thinks it is.

Does that have to be true? I thought IPOs were about selling the company.

Never mind the fact that companies do not think and this is like saying "My lemonade stand thinks it's going to have good sales this quarter."