novaRom

For me, this result is significant. It basically adds much more hope P is equal NP (that majority seems being against). I believe one day AI will explain a major flaw in modern mathematics, so a kind of correction in axioms will be suggested to prove Rieman's hypothesis (or a completely new apparatus)

> everyone but the US is now looking to divest from them as fast as possible

This! EU is now in full "decoupling" mode, many future contracts are now under reviews and plans how to preserve sovereignty.

Btw seeing what ArtCraft does it is now really realistic. Will it be SuSe + Mistral, or a kind of ArtCraft like vibe coded solutions?

Can this company ever be trusted?

Claude Fable 5's model card disclosed safeguards that would invisibly degrade output for requests linked to frontier LLM development. The research community called it "sabotage". Dean Ball: "degrading performance on ML research without telling the user is shockingly hostile" — including because it would corrupt third-party safety evaluators of Anthropic's own models.

What is unique about them? What is smth they have nobody else can reproduce?

It looks here in EU most talks recently about souvereign AI and how to quit digital dependence on oversea providers, at least first attempts to decouple. Thus I wonder if is there a place for new serious competitors?

The AI tech itself is likely very liberating - it seems allow to reproduce anything digital with less efforts than ever before, so others may simply replicate your business quickly?

Anthropic has a large in-house PR machine (80 people). Main functions are "attention flooding", well-resourced news-blitz strategy.

Circular financing at times of high inflation and geopolitical instability is risky. Company A invests in Company B, B invests in C, and C invests in A. If A is forced to sell its shares in B to raise cash, B's price drops. Now B is worth less, so C now loses money too. Self-reinforcement.

Why? The answer is directly in this article, : "for women particularly, the idea of marriage might not seem so appealing, in a culture where they were expected to bear most of the responsibility for household chores"

Btw, is it good or bad for individuals and for society?

> Microsoft has completely lost the ability to make good software

did they ever? maybe MS DOS, Win 3.1, and Win2000 were ok, although PC DOS and OS/2 were better; Sure what an unusable junk it's today is beyond any precedent in history, but why many companies use it today at all? why?

If the threat frontier companies describe is real, transparency is the cheapest insurance society can buy. Let them open their training data, I bet it's a lot of questions.

They are very nervous about "no moat anymore", so each week like those hysteria making news in order to establish self-regulated duopoly. What next proposal will be to ban open models? What a joke society has become, delegating its future into hands of monopoly seeking felons (training on copyrighted stuff, training on users' chats - see Naive-Stoke discovery).

I was opencode user, but like few months ago tried pi and never looked back. Pi with open models is absolutely mind-blowing - my agents run with speeds not achievable with any remote frontier model - they certainly not as smart, but it doesn't matter because they do their "work done" perfectly and fast.

All problems I had with opencode are not presented in pi - it looks it's the best approach to guarantee most productive coding environment - speed, simplicity, transparency, absolute customization. I will certainly try this 2.0, maybe they have now improvements.

Why is it not mandatory yet to disclose full trainig data used to produce any new model? Without it we cannot evaluate any product's safety.

They may talk about rogue agents, sandbox escapes, but this will not solve the core issue: secret training recipes are a security hazard in themselves. Full transparency is needed.

Nothing new, I always see attempts to cat ~/.ssh/*

Of course agents work in a strict sandbox, they always seem to understand it quickly on quite first turn; but they continue like trying to access something belonging to the host system despite they know they are in a sandbox.

Frankly many people run coding agents absolutely without any containment, entire companies - all their keys, code, data, trade secrets, everything goes to remote LLMs.

I cannot understand how is it legal to allow AI companies serving remote LLMs to steal users' data? Frontier models train on users' data, right?

Upvote. Also ban collecting, storing, and using users' data for training models (see how Navier-Stoke millenium problem solution was produced). But not just data, also recipes how this data is used to train models need to be released (see how HF was hacked).

If we really concerned about data privacy and concentration of power then it's logical to ban closed models instead.

It's just circular financing - we give you GPUs, you give us your shares of a promised future $ 2,000,000,000,000 valuation. Despite they are unprofitable today and tokens are getting cheaper and cheaper.

why "after" and not "before"?

The debt lasts longer than GPUs remain profitable, right? GPUs loose value most quicker than most investors believe. In best case they last like 2-3 years under heavy stress, so I think about all those data centers and what will it mean to replace those cards burned down - you cannot even replace one with newer one - all 8 GPUs should be the same type. Thinking about future costs with all the debt.

Yes, anything, not just software. I wonder if monopolies will somehow start falling or if they will try to defend themselves, are we on a path of continuous decentralization?

I wonder how many chat logs they did use in model's training data? If model consumes human’s reasoning (the chat logs) and then presents results as its own, it's a kind of parasite right?

Harvesting collective output of human consciousness to build AI that then replaces the very people who provided the input.

Mac's German keyboard was always pain for writing code. This is less relevant today because most of the input has become natural language so no need for brackets and other non alphanumeric symbols (which are terribly painful key combinations on Mac German keyboards).

I did use Mistral Web Chat a lot in the past years, but somehow went away because their UI become messy and default model has become a bit stupid in comparison with alternatives. Yesterday I tried it and compared with all other alternatives: Gemini, Mistral, Grok, Claude, ChatGPT (mobile apps, no subscriptions, default models), same prompt (a problem required sophisticated thinking and web searches), and surprisingly it worked better than any other free app. Closest was Grok which felt faster, but Mistral provided best solution.

If AI tech is so critical, then we have to do it completely open: any frontier AI company should become completely transparent - full public access to training data and recipes.

Aggressive marketing (including daily posts on HN). Many people simply don't know about alternatives, there are many people who never heard about pi and opencode and live comfortably in claude-codex bubbles.

> Mathematics has very little to do with the real world

But it's a construction based on very basic properties of the real world, at least on those properties we accept and perceive as very general and we use them as building blocks.

It will not just affect big software monopolies, but also hardware designer companies, cloud and streaming services. What the point to buy or pay subscriptions if you can reimplement it in a matter of days if not hours? A lot of business opportunities for small (even solo) enterprises. That's the power of AI revolution.

even with 256 bytes: https://dosasm.com