Upvoter33

ah cool - thanks for the clarification. some of the comments here read like nothing like this has ever been done before ...

Lots of great work that pioneered here (I wish the website did a better job showing that?)

e.g., Dr. Brett Seales and his decades of work: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.1601247

No that is not true. Read about PARC and all the crazy tech they built some time. It was ahead of its time!

Come on. It reads all the code in the world; then, you ask it to produce code; then, it gladly writes out something "new" which is a synthesis of what is out there, often with direct copying. It's more than reading.

Also connected: many composers would write out previous great works, to learn them more deeply. Bach as I recall would do this.

Which Hamming quote, btw, do you refer to? I think he mostly talks about talking with other "smart" people, and communicating what you are working on a lot (like giving talks, etc.). But, this doesn't read like much of a case for the humanities, per se.

this is true in all human endeavors. Tech is not special in this regard, alas.

It didn't strike me as modest, to compare oneself to another who is known to be great.

"Van Gogh is almost certainly a better painter than I am" -Monet

You know, there seems to be a hidden thought here that it's either just (A) let the Founders do their thing and of course they will provide great value and happen to become billionaires as a result or (B) tax those crooked cheaters who are taking our wealth.

There could be alternatives. For example, laws that ensure ownership of said companies is more widely held, so that the wealth is more evenly distributed among those who created it, for instance.

written with confidence too. I'm amazed at the levels of confidence people have in predicting the (unclear) future.

I'm having a hard time putting much faith into posts like these, especially as they near IPO.

I read this differently: they are actually seeing that it's hard to keep advancing frontier models, and now are moving the goal posts so that when they start getting evaluated more harshly, they can point to something like this.

"Links No Longer Mean Credibility" - did they used to? I mean, I mostly agree with this article but a person could have written this about the internet. I remember people linking to all sorts of random web pages and using that as a source of credibility.

I'm amazed by all the "people hate AI therefore this won't get anywhere". This is a first (perhaps real) attempt to envision what a desktop of the future looks like assuming AI progress continues. If I'm Apple, I'm very concerned about this, because it is the type of thing that will be tough for them to compete with if Google can pull it off. A traditional computer experience may be very different in a few years, and Google may suddenly be the company that can pull this all together...

Really? I see this all the time. Maybe I'm going to all the wrong places. I see "couples" on their phones, I see groups of friends on their phones, etc., etc. Maybe different parts of the country / world?

so is the Unix command line ...

me too. It's like it was written in 1980.

“The presence of greatness” - ugh.

Yes I’ve had to do this but it does work. Unfortunately it’s a constant cost to have to look for stuff like this and then do the work.

Honestly this thread was been one of the funniest HN threads I've seen. So much gold in here - for which I thank you all.

"My React website can't star React"

"in what sense is this software not a virus?"

"GitHub stars are great for measuring the number of GitHub stars a project has"

etc.

All gold.

Pretty dismissive ("when they grow up") of the group of people in the 16-24 year old range. These are not children; most of that group is 18 and over. You imply noise but there is clearly some signal in this result.

I mean, why not?

Haven't people seen the documentary, "Good Will Hunting"?

I don't think it's as simple as "corps. = bad". It's more that naive slogans like "don't be evil" used to be taken seriously. Companies exist to make money. This is ok! It generally works well in a capitalistic system. But to expect more than that people are realizing is a pipe dream... which is why you need good rules in place (i.e., regulations, laws) to direct companies and their behaviors.

We're going to see the same kind of thing we saw with the tobacco industry - CEOs claiming they had no idea the product was engineering to be addictive. I have even less faith that this anyone will hold anybody accountable though.

This part of the article was cringe for me. Like he wanted to impress Mia and once she didn’t react he realized he needed to change jobs.

BG and eBPF are awesome but this article read like a midlife crisis to me.

as usual with Trump supporters: trying to make both sides seem "equal" on election rigging, when one side (in 2020) caused Jan 6 to happen and still won't accept the election results from 2020, whereas a few fringe people (I guess) had some problems with 2024.

Loved that show. RIP.

Did the author exactly define "Nova Lite" somewhere in there?

I guess that makes it a luxury EV ...

Don’t know the cost here but I would fathom it’s not “cloud connected”