InsideOutSanta

Yes. "You choose to sign the contract" is not a reasonable argument, for two reasons:

1. There is one supplier, so you have no choice. 2. Even if you had a choice to sign the contract, this still means that it's not the same as a trade-in, because trade-ins are always voluntary, but once you have signed the contract, a right of first refusal is not.

In general, the "you chose to sign the contract" argument is a poor justification for bad contracts. If the contract is bad, it is bad regardless of whether you chose to sign it.

If you re-read your comment, you will find that your second paragraph is not evidence for the claim you make in your first paragraph. In fact, your first paragraph is just false.

As an author, that's a genuinely disheartening thing to read.

It took me a year to write a book. It took OpenAI and Anthropic a fraction of a second to ingest it. Do you understand now why I give zero shits if it takes Anthropic a billion to train a model, and Moonshot 10k in API cost to distill it?

We already know K3 is really good; you don't need to glaze it even more by telling us it's like Fable.

It's distrust - in foreigners, in each other - that got extremists elected, and it's distrust - in the media, in the institutions - that gives them unchecked power to destroy the country.

so are buybacks. you choose to sign the contract

Right, so they're not voluntary.

That's actually less bad than I assumed. High-end gaming GPUs are already almost at 600W with peak usage above that. I assumed it was much worse than that; that seems absolutely feasible for running at home.

Trade-ins are voluntary.

Leaning SQL is arguably less dev work over the long run than learning an ORM and then learning how it works so you can fix performance issues.

If we don't control the servers and validate the software on it, then we are taking someone's word for it

That's what trust is, though. I find Kagi worthy of trust since I have no evidence that they are doing anything that would violate my trust in them, and their incentives align with mine. I give them money, they give me good search results.

People are becoming more and more, justifiably, cynical. And it's good for society that they are.

I do not believe that this is good. Democracies are built on trust. Without trust, they die, as we can plainly see in the US right now, where people are so distrustful of each other that it is starting to destroy the very fabric holding together society itself.

Jurassic Park is science fiction, though.

So the quality of AI code will absolutely surpass that of human code. What then?

If they change their opinions in the future, they can reevaluate their stance and update their terms.

I love using LLMs for coding, but I think it's absolutely fine if people make different decisions. In fact, I think trying to maintain code repositories that are free of LLM-generated code is extremely valuable.

internet exists only because of ads

It rather feels to me that ads are destroying the Internet. The Internet did just fine before everything was full of ads, and it was a much better place.

Yeah, I don't mind these ads, just as I didn't mind ads on Google when they first came out. But once you have ads, there's huge monetary pressure to make them more effective over time, which inevitably ends in ads that pretend to be organic content.

I'm a customer of Kagi who is in no way affiliated with Kagi, other than sending them money. I agree with bayindirh: It’s possibly the single most impactful thing in my digital life.

I know that we live in a world where tech increasingly sucks, and positive comments on tech are (correctly!) seen as suspicious. The thing, though, is that Kagi is genuinely just a great product, and search is such a central part of using the Internet that good, trustworthy search makes a huge difference.

"There is a bubble" and "LLMs aren't useful" are two separate claims. You're contradicting the latter. The former can still be true even if the latter is false.

Yeah. I installed OpenCode in a container about a month ago, and I had a hell of a time figuring out how to get it into complete yolo mode.

OpenCode because of the large ecosystem. I'd like to use pi, but it's more limited if I want to run it in a VM and connect to it from the outside.

As somebody who bought an iPhone the day it became available and has been using iPhones for years, my favorite phone I've ever owned is my Huawei Mate XT Ultimate.

People keep pretending that Chinese companies only make second-class copies of American products until it's too late.

on the margin people are willing to pay a lot for slightly better models

That margin is getting smaller and smaller. I would have been with you a week ago; paying for Fable was worth it compared to all other models. But with K3, the difference has shrunk to the point where, for me, it's not worth the cost anymore.

In other words, it may be worth paying five times as much to get 10% better real-world outcomes for a lot of people, but a lot fewer people will pay five times as much to get 2% better outcomes.

a huge value is the Claude Code / Codex harness

For me, it's the opposite. Having to use Claude Code instead of the harness I prefer is a point against Anthropic, not for it.

There are confirmation dialogs by default, though.

Having come from Claude code, I was a bit shocked that both seem to allow edits by default with no confirmation dialog.

There are confirmation dialogs in OpenCode. You can configure them using the permission config, same as Claude Code. Having said that, as a general rule, none of these harnesses are safe to run on your local file system.

What's even funnier is getting upset about people not wearing helmets the second you hear about an accident, with no idea whether people did or did not wear helmets. All the article says is that "the hacker entered using valid credentials." There's no information about how they got the credentials.

If I came up with this counterexample, I sure as hell wouldn't give credit to Claude.

Thanks for spelling out your point, and yes, I don't agree with it. Being in prison is the punishment. People don't lose their humanity because they are in prison, and they don't need to or deserve to be additionally punished by forcing them to eat meals that go against their religious or ethical convictions.

What's more, people in prison usually don't stay there forever. The idea that it doesn't matter how we treat people in prison because "it's not a hotel" is not conducive to reintegration and is harmful to everyone, including you.

It's peculiar that I've never heard a vegan say anything even remotely like that, but I often see people complaining about how vegans constantly say things like that. How does that work? Is there a place I need to go to to find all these militant vegans who can't stop talking about how much I suck eggs for sucking eggs?

So I feel justified in classifying your comment as supporting my claim: "the US is so focused on culture wars that people can't visibly follow a vegan diet without being attacked for it."

I'm not entirely sure why you're arguing with me about this. 4G currently has much better coverage than 5G; that's just a fact. I'm sure "4G barely works anymore" is true for you, but you don't represent the world, much less India, where this phone is sold.

4G is currently the dominant mobile data network with the best coverage.

"They could have just not eaten it" and "they eat what they’re given" are literally opposites of each other. So you don't have an actual point; you're just being an asshat. Why don't you do that by yourself instead of involving other people in your personal misery?

You're proposing that they could have starved?