tomrod

This is a centrally-run implementation of CloudFlare's VibeSDK. It seems pretty solid for prototypes though there are some missing features - I can't figure out how to specify models in the AI Gateway specifically and the build model is fairly weak, it doesn't seem to set up any infra but workers / doesn't have a JSONC editor directly or let you configure infra. A drag-and-drop or scripting engine would be nice.

It does allow temporary git creds so you can clone to a repo and upload to one of your own, so that's nice and helps with the finish engineering portion.

Not sure about Anthropic, unless they continue to fall over themselves in ego. They have strong GTM in my take.

Google is a bit oblivious (though is probably the smarter money based on diversification alone IMHO). OpenAI has folks wondering just how publicly Mr. Altman can blunder his wording before he gets ousted (today was along the lines of "you will own nothing" with his take that personal RAM ownership being an affront to efficiency).

All three are trying to convince enterprise buyers that central tokenmaxxing is the best thing since sliced bread; many of the circles I run in occasionally have huge (emphasis: huge in the 2010s ZIRP sense) buyers that are begging for more edge AI.

Org 1 will probably survive better as they will adopt the right primitives - logging, compliance, etc.

Ref: Agent management by Microsoft, AI Gateways springing up everywhere, etc.

I feel this is black-titlebar worthy. RIP, you inspiring man.

Then I have failed to explain myself. What I was saying is that "economies of scope will reduce prices due to reduced costs" will be the core argument massive corps argue when merging and concentrating market size -- and that rarely happens in reality.

The BATNA:

- Other delivery service

- Other task service

- Go yourself

While they are an effective duopoly, it would be good to also consider them as monopolistic competition versus a true market split out -- there is very little traditional moat, and almost only network effect due to restaurants accepting their services and menu.

But economies of scope, such as they exist, can be good for consumer welfare (unpopular as that is to discuss in current public forums).

Two chunks of overhead (IT, web app, mobile app, finance, HR, etc.) instead of one can be bad for consumers too.

But yeah, flexing pricing increases to gobble up consumer welfare is what the FTC is supposed to rally against, and, while services expand their markets aren't that different.

EDIT: Wow, people really hate this comment! I'm not being normative here. Economies of scope are the thing that any acquiring companies with any reasonable market share will argue for their case, its textbook economics and what the FTC is trained for.

I like elif. It means exactly what I want it to mean!

I've asked myself this question as well.

Where I've landed -- once I get away from the distaste for load-bearing or a comment mentioning "spine" -- is that if the idea pushes me forward, challenges me towards improving, or otherwise informs, I'm okay with AI assisted writing.

I'm not okay with formulaic garbled nonsense, that annoys me!

Other way around. Raschka's been doing this over a decade.

What do you think is coming that isn't already in the old world?

Cerebras with Claude 8?

I appreciate that context!

Alphabet and Meta are misclassed, they are information technology.

Tesla should (probably) be in industrials, as a car and battery tech company.

Amazon is hard to class, you might check if they break out to subsidiaries for AWS versus consumer retail. Part is definitely competing with Walmart.

Any word on rooting TCL models?

This is the bucket I fall into. Seeing this everywhere and it makes a lot of sense to me.

I appreciate your comment as it sets expectations on what the technology can do today.

What would need to be true for the capability of creating and using antimatter to become feasible?

The amount depends on the margins to a degree. Now that tech XYZ exists, building a mimic probably requires less R&D, no?

Loitering is well defined topic, I think if we bog ourselves into a semantic wrestling match we'll lose valuable time from our lives for little value trying to convince the unpersuadable.

So I'll only go as deep as a quick search for "loitering definition" -- the first hit aligns to what I hold as my personal understanding:

    Loitering is the act of standing, lingering, or waiting around idly in a public or private place for an extended period without a clear, lawful, or obvious purpose.

We paid for a first class ride (but through a discount website, for like $10 difference? I still don't understand the pricing) that had us on a regional train then a local train in Germany. It was a new experience for us and came after about 20 hours of flights and layovers so we didn't want to have a challenge to arrive.

On the local train we were unable to take luggage into first class (a small number of seats blocked off by a plexiglass entrance), but folks were very accommodating of some clueless Americans just trying to go a few stops down the track.

The regional train was nice, but second class on the way back from our destination was just as comfortable.

Long story short, the claims of comfort and cleanliness between the classes didn't really seem apparent.

This made me laugh very hard. Thank you.

I think this is a fascinating technology. I wonder if it is currently energy positive (so that we can engineer it into a functional source) or at least if it can be extended to be captured in bulk (antimatter rockets!).

And if good product, they are usually known already by word of mouth.

Speak more on this, if you don't mind. I've worked some DBT migration projects before, and agree the manual management of everything was fairly time consuming. We used prefect for job management but DBT never struck me as fully baked (like most tech, I assume it has matured some since my time with it)

It's not always. I think there are cases where it should be. A transit center probably should have some wait areas, but generally should not be for loitering. Similar to airport pickup/dropoff.

Why not? Surely you can have defined intervention protocols and standards of care for mental health that don't require violence to initiate. Also, mental health issues is not equivalent to "poor."

I feel like you've argued from a false dichotomy -- we can't do X because of bad things, so we have to put up with Y and bad things.

I think the issue is loitering. Target and Costco can remove people from premises who loiter, but a public transportation system might not be able to do that *assuming no loitering statutes for the stations are in place.

I would personally be surprised if violent attacks are differentiated in rate between the two.

Hi! Like most people in the world, I don't normally respond to bad faith arguments like the ones you have posted in this thread regarding enslaving people for providing a "free" (clearly tax-funded) government service. Responding below the dead comment to let you know that. Have a good weekend.

I take your comment in the sardonic humor it conveys, hopefully it matches your intent.

The robber barons built libraries. Yes, it took some heat off of their reputation, but, they weren't idiots and neither were the people for whom they were driving wages down or driving prices up. They and municipal orgs of the time and other civic minded groups built libraries and schools because society is better off have more education. Capitalism, done right, actually can have good outcomes.

In a similar vein, healthcare makes people healthier as a general outcome. "Socialized medicine" (more properly understand of as healthcare as a publicly-provided good) enables a more healthy population -- business owners benefit because the people they can hire from are healthier, so more productive.

Public transportation in dense areas should be seen similarly. More efficient, lower pollution when expanded and widely available, easier to police, less of the nasties like PM2.5 from tires and asphalt, less road deaths, and so forth.

A fellow aficionado of German trains, I see.

People who understand budget constraints. Economics applies even outside of capitalism and democratic states.

For a first order argument, yes, because people won't use free very often.

But if the collected fares are paying for enhanced police brutality or other deleterious second-order system behavior, it's not so cut and dry.