vb-8448

Yep, but the attack surface is much smaller!

It's much easier to protect yourself if you have your infra behind a perimeter firewall you control.

You don't say!

> 29 of 35 answers were the same one.

Did they distillate from each other? :D

You’re right, mine are assumptions are just as much assumptions as yours.

However, if you’ve worked with coding agents and seen repositories that were mostly vibecoded, you’ve probably also seen how complex they became in a very short time. Even the estimate of 200 LOC per PR was conservative, actual number is very likely much higher.

In any case, even if a large portion of those lines were documentation, tests, or comments, those count as LOC too, and it’s simply not humanly possible to keep up.

PS: They could simply release more data and stop the debate, but for some reason, they don’t.

Actually LOC is a decent measurement, it becomes a bad measurement when you use it in the wrong way, like any other measurement.

Agree that 30k PR alone doesn't mean much, but there aren't other details on what's inside. Based on I saw on how LLM programming works, it's hard to believe that there are single-line fixes. If I have to bet I'd bet on 200 LOC on average, that is 6M/day. Even if only a small portion reach production, it's still insane.

No human can stay on par with 30k pull requests per day ... they simply don't have control on what's going on and rely on AI itself to do the job.

PS: I really want to know what is the churn rate (and the cost per LOC) here. My gut is saying the cost per LOC is insane, and they are basically rewriting over and over the same code.

If there are going to be multiple browsers with different implementation of the same standard frameworks will still matter.

If there are going to be no standard for basic things like a combo box frameworks will still matter.

> as of September, we merged over 30,000 per day.

I just wonder what is the churn rate (and the cost per LOC) here.

This is latests refactor, in older videos he stated more than once that llms are basically crap (and at the time he said that he was probably right, but it was very short sight)

Zitron complained about a lot of things, one some he was wrong (eg. llm are not useful), on others(eg. "magic accounting" or datacenters ) he has very good points ... but we will see.

You don’t say…

Anyway, if I had a hundred bucks to burn, I’d bet this is a move to undermine Anthropic’s IPO.

It's much simpler: they want others to experiment (and pay them) and see what works, once they know what works they will drive out of market other players.

What's your point?

It's even worse, we are crossing over into the realm of religion. The article against GML 5.3 is the equivalent of a Papal excommunication.

It's "I saw it on Google" on steroids.

Let's put this way: we need open models to protect against their rogue agents!

Hypocrites !

Project and top/middle managers exists basically to keep track of what other people are doing and to make sure deadlines are met and processes are followed.

A "dot" can replace easily tons of them.

i'm watching the keynote

The real announcement is the ultra fast mode ... Astra at 300t/s is insane!

They finally managed to get rid of project, middle and top managers!

Next natural step: CEOs staring tens of dots to control other humans and agents XD

My gut feeling is that the intent or motivation or whatsoever won't arrive from a single model but will be the result of several things: a frontier model for long reasoning sessions, some jev like models for more immediate actions, some improvements that will make the context rot less relevant, faster and more energy efficient models, a harness that coordinates everything.

Already today we can build some "fight or flight" mechanisms, and once you have done it the "intent" is not so far.

But the selling point is "its cheaper to run on api compared to codex/cc" ... but I, and a lot of folks, don't use API.

Wow .. fascinating but I guess something like JEV is more appropriate here.

I agree with OP that we will continue to see improvements, but there are also some serious bottlenecks ahead of us:

- Energy is not infinite, neither energy efficiency is. - Datacentres neither. - Benchmarks are an abstraction of real world problems!

On top, there is an overall "economic" aspect that most of the people miss: every change carries a certain degree of risk (lose money, reputation, customers, death of people, ecc) that very few want to take and a lot of changes(e.g. rewrite some piece of SW in another Lang) don't produce a positive economic impact.

Does it support subscriptions ? If not it's a no go for me.

Definitely not a musk fan, but what exact is your point? Other big labs aren't innocent little virgins.

They want transparency from everyone else but not for them ... you don't say.

They just care much more about their user's data.

I heard some of their employees sent to do some PR in podcasts: they are definitively disconnected from the reality.

Maybe internally they see really unbelievable things, but my impression is that they pushed so hard on agents that they don't have the grasp of the situation.