symfoniq

Wow. Clearly this isn’t a company I should be trusting to keep my email secure.

Except the robots actually cost far more than $1/hour, it’s just that the owners have enough capital to operate at a massive loss until the carpenters have largely been replaced. Only then will we learn what the robots actually cost.

AI “customer service” is so incredibly bad. I’ve not had a single interaction that an AI agent could solve. It’s just a huge waste of my time and an increase in aggravation.

And adding to this:

Does anyone really believe that the first company to AGI would decide not to release it in the interests of safety? Of course not. The first company to AGI would not forfeit their historic opportunity.

Yet, we are supposed to believe that in the name of safety, far less capable models are being held back by the very very same companies that are selling the AGI dream.

This is an industry that cannot speak, unless it is speaking out of both sides of its mouth.

Car companies sell mostly the same car every year. They don’t have billions (or trillions) of dollars of debt riding on the next model they release being substantially better and cheaper (closer to profitability) than the previous one.

These AI companies have been selling AGI as coming any day for a while now. If it doesn’t arrive soon, the safety angle may be the only spin that keeps the massive (and required) investments pouring in.

If instead the narrative became that LLM progress was slowing, we’d almost certainly be looking at the next global recession.

At this point, there is too much money in AI for the truth to have much of a chance.

This is exactly what I think is happening.

I resent (okay, resemble) this.

I don’t know why we should believe that Anthropic is actually doing this, instead of the alternative explanation that LLM advancements are slowing in general.

Ye shall know them by their fruits.

They’re using Electron to write proofs now?

In the same way that “Anthropic” apparently means misanthropic, we can probably add “AI safety” to the list of newspeak.

Or the "unicontext" that Derek Thompson recently wrote about.

I can nod along when I hear and read people talking about the dangers of these technologies and the endgame of their creators; and then suddenly very weird when everyone except me is nodding along that the answer must be similar (but different) technology!

It's as if technologists are stuck in a room of mirrors, unable to imagine a world in which "solutions" don't ultimately just continue to feed technology's increasingly anti-human takeover of everything.

I think the GP just showed that in a particular scenario, Ruby isn’t “radically slower” than Go. So how is the comparison not relevant?

As someone who spent 15+ years doing Ruby/Rails, it’s nice to see this land.

That said, these days you’ll pry the BEAM from my cold, dead hands. It’s hard to go back to any other concurrency story.

This is madness.

Only LG themselves should be able to have this kind of invasive control over your television.

OpenAI only exists due to the theft of content created by others.

If Apple’s accusations prove to be true, it just means that OpenAI is consistent.

Besides his role in Jurassic Park, I will always appreciate Sam Neill’s understated but important role as Borodin, the reliable and loyal First Officer in The Hunt for Red October. His character’s death (a change from the book) added emotional weight to the story.

That's one of the reasons CarPlay is non-negotiable for me: It limits the automaker's ability to enshittify the ownership experience.

I agree with the author: CarPlay is table stakes for me. Whenever an automaker says a car won't support CarPlay, I mentally cross it off my list. Which is fine, because there are plenty of other viable options.

And did you see Apple’s recent price increases?

There is a complete lack of courage in the leadership of tech companies today, and top-down AI mandates are just another manifestation.

True visionaries think outside the box, but most tech executives are forcing their employees into black boxes, out of fear of not doing exactly what their competitors are doing.

We have lemmings for leaders, and that means that—much like the LLMs that are being shoehorned into everything—there isn’t room for original thinking. Everyone’s strategy looks exactly the same.

Who would voluntarily do business with a company that does this? Not me.

As a huge film buff, I sadly agree. And theaters in my area aren’t doing a good job keeping their projection technology current. When we went to see “Wicked”, my wife leaned over and whispered that it would probably look better on our 77” OLED, and she was absolutely right. The theater image was dark and lacked vibrant color.

I sweat a lot and as a result try to avoid cotton for the most part. Wool is just a far better material in my experience, and doesn’t hold odor like cotton.

So you’re saying there’s an upside?

Agreed. I’m increasingly using the presence of AI slop as a primary signal about whether to avoid a company and its products.

VFR (visual) flights don’t require filing a flight plan.

Anthropic are trailblazers and this will be everywhere soon. It happened to me tonight with a different company. "We use AI to do our actual work, but please don't use AI for this coding challenge."

Maybe LLMs just make messes.