Running a decision model is way easier and much cheaper. Are they really just trying to capitalize on the hype here? It feels like they really have absolutely zero moat.
19,487 karma · joined October 14, 2012
Running a decision model is way easier and much cheaper. Are they really just trying to capitalize on the hype here? It feels like they really have absolutely zero moat.
Claims like this needs to be deeply analyized. Models do have some emergent capabilities[1], and I think there's a lot of evidence to show that semantics is actually learned (Word2Vec), and some math seems like it also might be learned (e.g. modular arithmetic). But it's hard to exactly say where there's some internal mechanism generating a true answer and where we're just getting lucky with some distribution so the answer just seems right.
It searched for "Aliexpress" on Google and clicked the link, hence the Google UTM params.
This is exactly what I'm doing, but mocking/randomizing all the sessions/cookies/params (like resolution, OS, WebGL , etc.) in a separate Chromium binary. It's popular these days, but imo using your normal browser for agentic stuff is a very bad idea. These models do dumb stuff all the time.
Not sure if I should release it, but I'm sure more people are catching onto the power of agentic browsing.
Remote: Yes
Relocation: Case-by-case
I'm an engineer and data professional interested in team-building, consulting and architecting data pipelines and AI/ML workflows. At Edmunds.com, I worked on a fairly successful ad-tech product and my team bootstrapped a data pipeline using Spark, Databricks, and microservices built with Java, Python, and Scala.
At ATTN:, I re-built an ETL Kubernetes stack, including data loaders and extractors that handle >10,000 API payload extractions daily. I created SOPs for managing data interoperability with Facebook Marketing, Facebook Graph, Instagram Graph, Google DFP, Salesforce, etc.
More recently, I was the CTO and co-founder of a crypto gaming startup. We raised over $6M and I was in charge of building out a team of over a dozen remote engineers and designers, with a breadth of experience ranging from Citibank, to Goldman Sachs, to Microsoft. I moved on, but retain significant equity and a board seat.
That I'm a top-tier developer goes without saying, but I'm also interested in flexing my consulting muscle and can help with best practices, architecture, and hiring. Would love to connect even if it's just for networking!
Blog: https://dvt.name/ (under construction)
Résumé/CV: https://dvt.name/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/res-2026-f.pdf
GitHub: https://github.com/dvx
Email: [d]@[dvt].[name]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orchestrated_objective_reducti...
Not sure why people are willing to believe this without actually fact checking. Yeah, Orange Man Bad, whatever, but come on. It's trivial to verify and trivially untrue.
And yeah, I guess if you dig deeper it's somewhat editorialized, but it's not literal Tianmen-tier censorship:
Been working professionally for ~15 years or so, and it's never been this bad. Other than "knowing someone" (i.e. a referral, and even that falls through routinely), not sure what the best way to snag a position is these days.
Fractal tool discovery: tool taxonomy where an agent can "drill deeper" to find what specific tool it's looking for. Helps if/when polluting context with a zillion (mostly unnecessary) tools.
Leveraging splay trees: this is my favorite data structure and I think relatively unused in the context of agents/harnesses. A lot of times, recently-used workflows/tool-chains will be used again, so having those at the top of the search hierarchy is an awesome optimization.
Virtual containerized notebooks: models working in sandboxed (WASI) Python notebooks is incredible. Even local models (if given enough time) will usually converge on a good solution. Being able to mount tools/resources/fs is again, imo quite untapped. Some problems here are running native things (thing numpy/pandas) in containers is a nightmare (or impossible).
Anyway, happy to see other folks seriously doing stuff in this space. If anyone wants to collaborate on anything don't hesitate to reach out :) I'm also actively looking for a job or some contract gigs.
Fun times ahead.
I think this would be likely comparable to a scheduled backup, so I think it would be an acceptable maintenance window. However, deterministic algorithms would likely beat re-training (or re-fine-tuning) the model. For example, one could analyze actual distributions or whatever (instead of assuming uniform), and then some plans would automatically be eliminated.
Imo a good thought experiment is to look at places that are hyper-optimized, like compilers. Would LLMs bring anything to the table (architecturally or performance-wise) to a piece of software that has been carefully crafted for decades? (Methinks no.)
The protocol will of course be `text -> text` for the typical LLM (though some new models are structured, as we saw yesterday with Jev). Even so, the user doesn't need to be exposed to the protocol (almost ever). It's not like I'm crafting a POST request to send this form.
There's a lot of room for window dressing, and I look at AI like I look at the touch-screen. It was a fun technical toy until people (mostly Apple) poured in a lot of serious effort into "ok, how do we make this pleasant to use, intuitive, and genuinely useful?"
I know this all sounds abstract. I've been mulling over it for the past year and it's very hard; and LLMs are super janky and inconsistent so it's 100% not trivial. So in some sense I understand why a lazy bottom-of-the-barrel "chat interface" has become the de facto standard.
This isn't necessarily true. I'm working on a local harness that doesn't do this and instead coerces everything to YAML (including tool calls) for better bucketing. Some models are indeed trained on the `<|tool_call>...<tool_call|>` token schema (or something similar—e.g. jinja), but it's vendor-specific and often times inconsistent (so you're constantly fixing calls or going back to the LLM).
Was trying to combine AI with generative storytelling with a card game. It was a fun experiment. To play, you'll have to get a friend to queue up at the same time.
I was referring to the "AI labs" here. Sam Altman himself conceded that OpenAI is losing money on the $200 subscription. Using open-weight/open-source models is indeed cheaper (and no reason for inference to be subsidized).