dcre

Wish people crying “marketing” would think about what it is they’re claiming.

Think about what you’re saying. If Jarred does it because he wants to, what does marketing have to add? How do they “cash in on it”?

Both!

I don’t understand why anyone thinks management of any kind was involved in this at all. It seems much more plausible to me that Jarred just does what he wants. He has said as much.

since AI makes rewrites to certain languages relatively easy

This premise makes no sense. AI makes rewrites to any language easy.

I think we actually are seeing an app explosion, just not a consumer app explosion.

A joke but also not a joke.

This reads to me as fully written by LLMs. Pangram agrees. Note the (alleged) author misHQ’s comments on this thread are getting downvoted as obvious slop.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48706307

Even if it were written by hand, it’s a very poor and frankly stupid essay about an interesting topic. “The model's attention is a fixed quantity, and it has to add up to one, so the more things you make it look at, the less of that attention any single earlier thing can keep.” This is borderline gibberish and it outright rejects the interesting question about LLMs and attention, namely that they have very different capacities from us. LLMs can read an entire OpenAPI schema in seconds and immediately construct valid requests from it. The article first points this out, and then switches to arguing that LLMs have similar limits to us. It’s completely incoherent.

That message is obviously aimed at the government. See the other thread.

All we can say is empirically this is not true. Plenty of people whose full time job is managing rack infra are sick and tired of the customizability of commodity hardware, of the many custom bugs in commodity software, and of the customizability of the price of VMware.

Source code here :)

https://github.com/oxidecomputer/rack-explorer

Thanks, missed it!

He has said every month for the past three years that there is no technical progress left to be made in LLMs and that there is no more room in the market for inference spending to grow.

Here[0] is a fun selection of excerpts from his July 2024 post "How Does OpenAI Survive?"[1]

"I see no signs that the transformer-based architecture can do significantly more than it currently does."

[0] https://xcancel.com/pathsnotchosen/status/206360940100129633...

[1] https://www.wheresyoured.at/to-serve-altman/

Jane Street’s profit per employee (profit, not revenue) in 2025 was high single-digit millions per employee.

Yeah, I agree — not a big difference for me between the Opuses. I really just meant Opus 4.x.

Claude Code (or Codex, or OpenCode, or Pi, or Amp — whatever) can do this out of the box without any skills or special tools. The most important thing for making results like this easier to achieve (in any harness) is using the best current models. Right now that's Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5.

They're only good at it because that's what they're good at? Come on.

They are metered. That's why their ARR went from $9B to $45B in 6 months.

I must have thought I wrote something that I didn't actually write in the previous comment — I can't figure out what "as I said" is supposed to be about.

In any case, maybe I was too subtle. I was talking about Mythos, a model that continues the trend, but which is not available to the public yet. The "overwhelming evidence" is the testimony of the people who have used it. The irrational skepticism was people who don't believe that testimony. In other words, we do know the future, because we know that model and others like it will come out soon.

And there's a whole lot more evidence than that!

I think we have quite good reason to expect more. As I said, we already know (caveat with your level of irrational skepticism toward the overwhelming evidence) that the best existing models are better than the ones publicly available.

Judging from the fact that the Opus 4.5 inflection point was not really anticipated, and we still don’t really know what threshold was crossed that suddenly made agentic coding accessible to so many more people, I think it’s safe to say we don’t know what the thresholds will be until they’re crossed. The fact that we don’t know exactly what they’ll be isn’t a good reason to think there won’t be any more.

1. Global IT spend is $6T per year

2. Where does this $5T number come from? If they make $4T in revenue over the next 5 years instead, what happens?

I don’t think “Usage has plateaued except for coding” is compatible with lab ARR at $80B and still growing exponentially.

https://www.theinformation.com/articles/anthropic-openais-sh...

Weird is far too generous. It’s a travesty of thinking.

It’s not deviating up and down. It’s deviating upward. It is necessarily going to wildly overstate the previous 12 months’ revenue while wildly understating the next 12 months’ revenue. There is no way to describe exponential growth in a single number that doesn’t do this. This is why adults with a brain look at the series.

A new Mythos checkpoint improves significantly on the previous one (and beats GPT-5.5-Cyber) on this benchmark.

Most of Bun’s code is already written by LLMs. If you feel that way, it’s already been too late for a while. Furthermore, we’re talking about a million line port done in a couple of days. The question of whether it’s worth the time looks extremely different if done by hand. It would take a year.

Thank you for the link.

While this is a fundamentally stupid story to begin with, it was at least reported somewhat better in other venues. The original report came from The Information, and at least this Yahoo Finance[0] writeup mentioned that. This article has very little content and no sourcing.

[0] https://finance.yahoo.com/sectors/technology/articles/ubers-...