adamisom

I don't what you are talking about but it's nonsense and offensive

This just reads as "I don't know whether you're on Other Team.. but, I'll assume you are, here goes:"

The very first thing I did vibe-coding was commit my prompts and AI responses. In Cursor that's extremely easy—just 'export' a chat. I stopped for security concerns but perhaps something like that is the way.

Where is the resulting software?

Everywhere.

Remember Satya Nadella estimating 30% of code at Microsoft was written by AI? That was March. At this point it's ubiquitous—and invisible.

It's hard to see how suffering gets into the bits.

The tricky thing is that it's actually also hard to say how the suffering gets into the meat, too (the human animal), which is why we can't just write it off.

I like Manus's suggested follow-up questions.

In fact, sometimes I screenshot them and use Mac's new built-in OCR to copy them, because Manus gives me three options but they disappear if I click one, and sometimes I really like 2 or even all 3.

Personally, I don't understand how LLMs work. I know some ML math and certainly could learn, and probably will, soon.

But my opinions about what LLMs can do are based on... what LLMs can do. What I can see them doing. With my eyes.

The right answer to the question "What can LLMs do?" is... looking... at what LLMs can do.

easy, let them all judge then? you guessed it...

a CEO laying off 3% scales in absolute numbers as the company grows

should, therefore, large companies, even ones that succeed largely in a clean way by just being better at delivering what that business niche exists for, be made to never grow too big, in order to avoid impacting very many people? keep in mind that people engage in voluntary business transactions because they want to be impacted (positively—but not every impact can be positive, in any real world)

what if its less efficient substitutes collectively lay off 4%, but the greater layoffs are hidden (simply because it's not a single employer doing it which may be more obvious)?

to an extent, a larger population inevitably means that larger absolute numbers of people will be affected by...anything

yeah this agency is kinda what I imagined DOGE was created to be. alas now I am just confused

This is how people surround themselves with "yes men" But this always results in the death of a business

I think you are conflating a "business yes man" with a "newspaper angle yes man". It is fine for a major newspaper to endorse certain values, and distance themselves from others! It's fine because it's a big country with a lot of newspapers!

I don't see how this is remotely incompatible with the parent. What percentage of the 8am-2am grind, do you think said Elon-tweets take? 1%? Less? What the team is doing during the unpublicized 99% is of more interest to me.

Wow it just ate the rook huh?

a "no-brainer"? for a one-time reduction? that severely damages America's ability to generate wealth? am I taking crazy pills today? I advise you to compare America's GDP per capita and especially disposable income per capita to any other country. wealth generation matters so much more than distribution.

Yeah with a "default yes" approach it'll be easily bypassed. With a "default no" it would work, ie you simply don't get an account at all until you prove your age.

Remarkable that it starts with "Of course"

Heh, only the laughingstock to you and your bubble, I guess

Students are more arrogant than LLMs (but still more generally intelligent)

Agree up til last paragraph: how's Altman involved? Otoh Sutskever is a true believer so that explains his Why

Special in the sense of scale does not equate to special in the sense of adapting to your business' needs/culture/sensemaking

Let them have some excitement, God knows Tulsans need it

finally a sensible metric!

"worse": in the last 10-15 years? Because the Industrial Revolution was... before that

think about what would motivate one

to be blunt, I think just someone who thinks differently than you, clearly they do not think it's an absurd bill, that's what the whole piece is about...

Since the dawn of man we've wondered: can I make fire? Can I set this on fire? And the modern conundrum: is this material flammable, or inflammable?

Snark is a signal of cheap argument: They have nothing more serious to say

They may well have something more serious to say, and it doesn't imply a weak argument in itself. I think it's fair to say the author does have something more serious to say; the question, really, is do you. All you've done is reduced the OP to the same tired discourse, and proclaimed which side you're on, but you know, there really is more to the linked essay than that.

I understand but reject their presumption.

Yes, the one I did. Launch School (their Capstone program) is 1 year 18%ish ISA. Since, when I did it, 100% of my cohort got real-Dev jobs averaging 120k+, the school still got 20k+/student. They're the anti-lambda school in my book. If anything too modest in their marketing. Best decision of my life.

Maybe we just need higher taxes for the biggest corporations.

Seems to me that'd exacerbate the problem. We need more efficient business, not less. (An evergreen need, while !utopia.)

whether those children are going to lead a life worth living or not' so that only life that is worth living ends up reproducing

But... most people's lives are worth living, per their own revealed or even stated preferences, despite an apparent contagion of anxiety/depression/etc.

For the natalist to attempt to improve life is proof that they are not a natalist

An assertion with no reasoning. Generally, I can think something is good and simultaneously wish it to be better.

Because innovation will likely decrease simultaneously with needing to support a far greater fraction of unproductive retirees.

I also always wonder if folks with your view see no moral issue with humanity disappearing, or with mass population decline in any way other than fewer children being born.