j45

Appreciate the breakdown.

It's totally wild that there isn't an interactive script/check already built to test, detect, and run the solution on all fronts.

After seeing the alternative creative suite... I'm not so sure I can doubt it anymore.

Imagine the backwards compatibility.

Maybe someone will vibecode a replacement.

Personally I can't wait for Wordpress to be revibecoded by super experienced devs.

That's a fair way to think about it.

Most technologies seemed doom and gloom, and also have absorbed existing jobs for new ones, and current LLMs as AI is a bigger sponge than usual.

Interesting idea - I'm not sure if there's enough reliability that another LLM would reliably answer the same way over time since it's non-deterministic.

Just because you can't imagine a scenario doesn't mean one doesn't exist, or couldn't exist.

That's a pretty risky way to build blind spots and it's worth learning more about this.

When you make the product work with your words, you're doing the training and improvements to get it to that line as a pattern which then lets models "improve" from your corrections.

How would they know when to bring it up?

A determination of it has to be made some way beyond looking for frustrated or angry keywords.

If there was direct transparency regarding this it would be great vs digging into it on our own.

I have noticed this as well, when it can't help me and I thought it might be a difference in models, or using the same account somehow (tried a different one).

These models may not train directly on my chats and data, but in some cases it does seem to keep an impression of the pattern and process.

When claude code asks how the session is going, has it not already uploaded or detected something in my so called private coding session of interest to it?

This has been explained to me as being true by someone I trust a lot, to the point that they have implemented proxying to prevent it.

It would be funny to ask the profs if they are allowed, by law, to read 3 textbooks on a subject and then write a 4th themselves.

After a 1.5 billion settlement, the professor/authors are saying it's not enough.

The judge had an interesting summary of AI:

"He compared AI training to how humans can read, internalize and remember a book’s themes and style. “Like any reader aspiring to be a writer, Anthropic’s LLMs trained upon works not to race ahead and replicate or supplant them — but to turn a hard corner and create something different,” he wrote."

Uneducated and privileged take by the professor.

Ability to pay might influence this outcome.

The ways to use ai are still evolving

Disposable prototypes were the goal in some cases.

Possibly using AI as a search engine which it's not always great at, and then deciding why not.

They will capture share of labour as the labour works today.

There will be, as is always the case, some amount of new labour skills that emerge and I can't say for sure what percentage or amount that might be.

Looking at tech work being increasingly well the last 20-30y, we can imagine new ways of working might be pretty valued.

What about the claim itself being made?

The article refers to an acquisition they did in this space.

Folks over time do build their own, or alternative tools.

In the model space the open source efforts have been not disappointing at all.

First it was licensing per cpu, now gpu?

Can you offer a better word?

Looking at the general definition of colonialism... .. .

Whether it's colonialism, economic arbritrage.. if this is so bad, happy to learn other options.

Good point. up to 25% is no small number either.

After offers, they could enforce any percentage of layoffs up to 25%, no?

Offers often come before layoffs, no?

The return to shareholders path is difficult and will only raise prices and enshittify things.

Maybe they are shedding workforce to spend more on AI infrastructure like many of the other layoffs to remain competitive.

The layoffs could have nothing to do with the employees.

This many layoffs is likely far beyond "checked out" employees.

It's probably taking advantage of economic arbitrage, plus healthy beliefs in what AI can maintain.

The interesting thing will be to see what new things companies who do this can achieve.

The question above whether to take it now or try to delay taking a package is an interesting thought.

Like with any deal, it's important to be able to run the numbers at any time.

Profs need to learn how to use AI productively or someone else will.

It seems one is more specialized for the purpose and compare it against a general purpose LLM instead of a specalized/focused LLM?

This is like saying I compared this against photos for sure stored in a home swimming pool (CNN), compared to photos presumably stored in an ocean (generalized LLM).

I use LLMs where I can, but I'm no automatic fan of LLMs, a healthier comparison here seems to be what if a general purpose LLM was provided those CNN images, and perhaps what does a fine tuned local model with the CNN images perform like?

It still might not be better, but I would suspect it's closer, and a more realistic apples to apples comparison.

General assistant models compared to task specific models seem to be a well known spot where things don't always fit, but might be improving.

Efficiency could mean creating more with the same labour, not creating the same amount with less labour.

AI is a definite possibility, part of it makes me wonder how much it's about the new skills needed for film/media are tied to technology or AI.

Technology has almost always been adopted in Hollywood.

Media grew to become social media, and skills of social media became relevant and new positions.