dheatov

That's one high profile instance of human vs robot. Surreal.

If they're selling at a discount, and everyone is optimistic about the market, that's just free money for everyone else right.

They shouldn't and they won't. That will introduce a new metric -- %user disabling AI, and it will definitely be non-zero, which threatens the "everyone loves AI" narrative, which is the only thing thats floating all the tech-related valuation right now.

Now we fully understand the sustainable business model of Framework.

All party in the deal understands this. They are just convinced they will no longer be around when things go wrong, hence won't be held accountable for this particular decision.

Now Im suspecting if it's possible that VCs are part of the money loop, thus they are more than happy to fund as long as you pour enough of the funding back into the "AI ecosystem".

They used SO many words to say so little thing. At this point it seems pretty safe to say Mythos is purely PR stunt.

Why even rust at the first place? I dont see why we can't go straight from natural language -> Claude -> HTML/JS/CSS bundle. Instead of writing webpage, one can just write prompt for each page and serve it with claude.cgi

I for one am REALLY GLAD to see it consumes itself.

I did not see any based counterargument that addresses my concern.

Thanks for pointing out. So close to buying it. Would appreciate more disclosure regarding the use of hostile technology.

AI policy with AI usage is always difficult to write/read. Lengthy, frontloaded with excuses, values, and big words, followed by more words to fill the gap between sliced up ugly truth.

AI policy without AI usage is easy to read and write.

> We don't use them. That's it.

However when improved tools are obtained by these capitalists whose business model has no hint of sustainability, what's next is a modern Phoebus cartel situation where further improvement will be restricted or even prohibited to fabricate need for things like "uv Enterprise Pro".

They don't really care or like what Astral is doing right now, but they have thoughts about what they can make Astral do for them, and they really fancy those thoughts.

Assuming the actual price for many user is closer to 1k USD/mth than to 200 USD/mth, and the actual price is closer to their target margin to be a viable business, they're practically subsidising usage after 200 USD/mth. Together with other AI-TECH doing the same, they fabricate a false sense of "AI is capable AND affordable", which imo is evil.

It's really impressive how powerful and efficient it has become. However, I find it so much more difficult to build mental model of it. I've been struggling with atomic and r/w barrier as there are sooo many ways the instructions could've been executed (or not executed!).

The stochastic nature, minimal amount of care required to get something going, and the inefficiency, just to name a few.

I doubt it's anywhere near million. Non-zero? Sure.

But even for those scenario where "AI" helps, I still believe there exists other alternatives that doesn't consume unreasonable amount of energy and are not megacorp controlled blackbox. Usually it's just better tooling, and/or a change in the process.

The reason why "AI" is simply bad is way beyond malicious abuse of these stochastic models, thus the analogy of banning phone doesn't actually work.

On the creative side, I feel like punk act like this, fighting back against all these throat-shoving and gaslighting, is pretty artistic.

Reminder that this is not the web we want.

Seems like coudflare activated the maximum llm-scraper-bot-protection for everyone.

Feel like IDA Pro counts.

Less competent PMs are shoving capital A and capital I everywhere in panic mode, getting even more anxious as every failure exposes and deplatforms them even more.

They couldve spent time to understand the problem domain and think more, if theyre not already busy fabricating a resume to sneak into The Actual Big Tech.

I feel like plagiarism is an appropriate analogy. Student can always argue they still learn something out of it and yada yada, and there's probably some truth in it. However, we still principally reject it in a pretty binary manner. I believe the same reason applies to LLM artifacts too, or at least spiritually.

Position brought in to do "AI transformation" needs to deliver, and they have no way other than keep shoving it harder and harder.

It's so much worse with decade old brands as most of us cant just not use it, and these min-maxxer AI people are definitely taking advantages of it.

Extremely likely.

Related news: https://focustaiwan.tw/society/202506120025

* Randomly load up previous chat as the default and just wait for bing pot. * "Tiny oopsie doopsie, our bad."

I believe its just marketing. The "AI" will ultimately be used as a Natural Language Calculator. IMO we will eventually give up trying to make calculator designs, plans, reviews and interprets. Things too good to be true will fade and remain academic after the bubble bursts.

I am anti-reading content generated by probabilistic model of human language, especially if published without much editing. Em-dash is a strong indicator of such.

Yea I missed that possibility. The race to establish authority is very much real.

Totally agree. This kind of disclaimer/disclosure with strong wording does not make sense for a product of for-profit company. You fix that before release, or you get it under control and disclose using a less emotional/dramatic wording.

Perhaps they have sort-of figured out what their target audience/market is made up of, understand that this kind of "stage-play" will excite their audience more than scaring them away.

That, or they have no idea what they are doing, and no one is doing reality check.