whynotminot

Love this kind of behind the scenes -- thanks for sharing!

Personally, I think in a way you both ended up right. Content is king. But with the iPad (my favorite PDF viewer) as an important part of the Preview landscape now, I view the right side as where content should live.

I still love Opus but it's just too expensive / eats usage limits.

I've found that 5.3-Codex is mostly Opus quality but cheaper for daily use.

Curious to see if 5.4 will be worth somewhat higher costs, or if I'll stick to 5.3-Codex for the same reasons.

As long as both companies remain stable and viable, there's probably limited upside to pouring more money into them. If they fail, and bring down the AI ecosystem with them, that is very bad news for Nvidia. So they've been there nurturing their success and providing capital to backstop their exponential growth.

You can see Nvidia stepping in throughout the ecosystem with confidence boosting investments where needed. They haven't just supported Anthropic and OpenAI.

If OpenAI and Anthropic succeed, and get their business fly-wheels fully spinning, they don't necessarily need more capital from Huang. Ultimately the goal of Nvidia is to profit from their long-term success by selling them GPUs for a long, long time. The goal isn't to keep plowing money into them forever.

You could get something smaller but have it closer to your face than 1m?

The sort of “visual impact” a screen can have is mostly a combination of what percentage of your FOV it consumes.

People think they’ve got a bunch of screen real estate when they buy a big TV to use as a monitor… and then they use it a twice or more the distance of a regular monitor.

I get it. I’m scared too. I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t.

> Actually it is not about this stage. It is about the sustainability of this when training data runs out

This is an argument from 2024. Somehow, the models have continued to improve.

If they stopped improving today they are good enough as they already are to generate profound change.

The wave front is already visible, we’re just on the shore waiting for the impact.

Personally at this point my combined AI spend is the most expensive recurring monthly subscription I have, and that’s even with my company also paying for the AI tools I use at work.

If it weren’t subsidized I would pay more. Wouldn’t be happy about it but I would do it.

At this stage in the game I don’t really understand where this skepticism of the value these tools provides comes from.

What? SoftBank has been investing in them repeatedly for years now.

This lazy kind of post annoys me because it sort of groups any of us saying that this technology is profoundly different in with all the town criers who have said this kind of thing before — even if we have never said it before and were even skeptical of past declarations

Effectively, it’s a statement saying nothing can ever be profoundly different, because people have said it before and been wrong.

Lazy.

I would guess there's not enough volume due to limited use-cases of the tech compared to more traditional screens.

The typical e-ink uses cases boil down to e-readers, dumb-phones, and hobbyists, which is not a huge market. Anything niche or specialized tends to carry a higher cost.

> In my org, oncall is just who gets the 2am phone call. They can *try* to contact anyone else if needed.

Emphasis mine.

> Claude is there as long as you're paying

If you’re at a company that doesn’t pay for AI in the year 2026, you should find a new company.

> and I hope he doesn't hallucinate an answer.

Unlike human coworkers with a 100% success rate, naturally.

Do you know what on call means?

It means Sam is 7 beers deep on Saturday night since you’re the one on call. He’s not responding to your slack messages.

Claude actually is there though, so that’s kind of nice.

Yeah. Everyone sort of assumes that not having personally written the code means they can’t debug it.

When is the last time you had an on call blow up that was actually your code?

Not that I’m some savant of code writing — but for me, pretty much never. It’s always something I’ve never touched that blows up on my Saturday night when I’m on call. Turns out it doesn’t really change much if it’s Sam who wrote it … or Claude.

The hallucination rate with the Gemini family has always been my problem with them. Over the last year they’ve made a lot of progress catching the Gemini models up to/near the frontier in general capability and intelligence, but they still felt very late 2024 in terms of hallucination rate.

Which made the Gemini models untrustworthy for anything remotely serious, at least in my eyes. If they’ve fixed this or at least significantly improved, that would be a big deal.

It’s also pretty wild to me how people still don’t really even know how to use it.

On hacker news, a very tech literate place, I see people thinking modern AI models can’t generate working code.

The other day in real life I was talking to a friend of mine about ChatGPT. They didn’t know you needed to turn on “thinking” to get higher quality results. This is a technical person who has worked at Amazon.

You can’t expect revolutionary impact while people are still learning how to even use the thing. We’re so early.

> Be careful here. I have more coworkers contributing slop and causing production issues than 10x’ing themselves.

Sure, many such cases. We'll all have work for a while, if only so that management has someone to yell at when things break in prod. And break they will -- the technology is not perfected and many are now moving faster than they can actually vet the results. There is obvious risk here.

But the curve we're on is also obvious now. I'm seeing massive improvements in reliability with every model drop. And the model drops are happening faster now. There is less of an excuse than ever for not using the tools to improve your productivity.

I think the near future is going to be something like a high-speed drag race. Going slow isn't an option. Everyone will have to go fast. Many will crash. Some won't and they will win.

> But I think we're in world where very soon, companies will be demanding their engineering departments converge to the lived experience of the people who are seeing something like the author.

I think this part is very real.

If you’re in this thread saying “I don’t get it” you are in danger much faster than your coworker who is using it every day and succeeding at getting around AI’s quirks to be productive.

This is often a commonly blamed reason, but I think the data at this point pretty strongly suggests that the more affluent a country is the less kids they have.

You look at some of the most third world places in the world without strong economic security, yet somehow they manage to have babies at a higher rate than Western countries do.

Don’t get me wrong Gemini 3 is very impressive! It just seems to always need to give you an answer, even if it has to make it up.

This was also largely how ChatGPT behaved before 5, but OpenAI has gotten much much better at having the model admit it doesn’t know or tell you that the thing you’re looking for doesn’t exist instead of hallucinating something plausible sounding.

Recent example, I was trying to fetch some specific data using an API, and after reading the API docs, I couldn’t figure out how to get it. I asked Gemini 3 since my company pays for that. Gemini gave me a plausible sounding API call to make… which did not work and was completely made up.

Gemini models also consistently hallucinate way more than OpenAI or anthropic models in my experience.

Just an insane amount of YOLOing. Gemini models have gotten much better but they’re still not frontier in reliability in my experience.

Was just thinking that. “Working as designed”

So you want a video of me coding at work using AI? There are entire YouTube channels dedicated to this already. There are already copious blogs about people's AI workflows -- this very post you're commenting in is one (do you find reading hard?)

Clarify the actual thing you need to believe the technology is real or don't reply.

Ah, it couldn't generate a 100% complete working browser from scratch in a week. I guess the technology is cooked.

> AI misinformation? Please do provide some examples.

Like saying they can't generate compiling code in this very thread?

I don't see how anything you're saying is a response to what I said.

I agree that this will be the end result over time, maybe even faster than we expect. And as those speed pressures increase, AI will take over more and more of the development process.

You’re asking to see my company’s code base?

It’s not like with AI we’re making miraculous things you’ve never seen before. We’re shipping the same kinda stuff just much faster.

I don’t know what you’re looking for. Code is code it’s just more and more being written by AI.

Sounds like a skill issue. I’ve seen it rapidly increase the speed of delivery in my shop.

Anyone who’s been a developer for more than 10 minutes knows that best practices are hard to always follow through on when there’s pressure to ship.

But there’s more time to do some of these other things if the actual coding time is trending toward zero.

And the importance of it can go up with AI systems because they do actually use the documentation you write as part of their context! Direct visible value can lead people to finally take more seriously things that previously felt like luxuries they didn’t have time for.

Again if you’ve been a developer for more than 10 minutes, you’ve had the discouraging experience of pain-stakingly writing very good documentation only for it to be ignored by the next guy. This isn’t how LLMs work. They read your docs.

Of course software hasn’t been delivered fast enough. There is so so so much of the world that still needs high quality software.