prng2021

What is this conversation even about? I can’t understand any of it.

xAI had $2.5B in operating losses in the past quarter. What savings are being passed on?

Thanks for the irrelevant comment. I’m criticizing these Chinese companies because these aren’t accomplishments. Where did I praise Anthropic?

[flagged]

“That unlocks something beyond energy savings: the possibility of eliminating water consumption entirely.”

They’ve made this claim numerous times in the article and I really don’t understand it. The building has tons of water being recirculated through it. That water came from somewhere in the surrounding natural world. How is that 0 water consumption?

We’ve got a company of several thousand employees serving hundreds of millions of people arguably the best AI model in the market. Meanwhile you’re asking for a handkerchief for your pool of tears because their product is struggling to do your daily job functions for you, with much of that due to being limited by the worlds supply of silicon, electricity, water, and other resources. Cry me a river.

Yes but my original reply was to someone that seemed to imply that this founder was dumb not to verify that Railway’s API key that should have been limited to managing custom domains, truly was limited to managing custom domains. I’ve never used Railway but my pushback is that no one in the real world exhaustively verifies a key is scoped properly against all 3rd party endpoints. We trust vendors to document how they’re scoped and to actually do that.

“why would you not do the same for APIs you integrate with?”

Who does that? Jira and Salesforce have hundreds of endpoints each. AWS has hundreds of services, and each may have hundreds of endpoints. Who on your team is testing key scopes of every endpoint? Do you do it for each key you generate? After all, that external system could have a bug at any moment in managing scopes. Or they could introduce new endpoints that aren’t handled properly. So for existing keys, how frequently do you re-validate the scope against all the endpoints?

Sorry but are you implying that for every system you integrate with, you verify the scope of an API key by checking each CRUD operation on every API endpoint they provide?

How is anyone predicting timelines for AGI when these systems can’t do basic addition of 2 arbitrary numbers with 100% accuracy?

“I think the decision was made because the people making this decision at Anthropic are well-intentioned, driven by values, and motivated by trying to make the transition to powerful AI to go well.”

Every single one of these CEOs happily pirated unimaginable amounts of copyrighted content. That directly hurt millions of real human beings. Not just the prior creators but also crushing the future potential for success of future ones.

https://www.susmangodfrey.com/wins/susman-godfrey-secures-1-...

“You never needed 1000s of engineers to build software anyway”

What is the point of even mentioning this? We live in reality. In reality, there are countless companies with thousands of engineers making each piece of software. Outside of reality, yes you can talk about a million hypothetical situations. Cherry picking rare examples like Winamp does nothing but provide an example of an exception, which yes, also exists in the real world.

This was a great article. The section “Training for the next state prediction” explains a solution using subagents. If I’m understanding it correctly, we could test if that solution is directionally correct today, right? I ask a LLM a question. It comes up with a few potential responses but sends those first to other agents in a prompt with the minimum required context. Those subagents can even do this recursively a few times. Eventually the original agent collects and analyzes subagents responses and responds to me.

Hard to tell how widespread it is but it’s not just 1 company. https://www.webpronews.com/silicon-valleys-2025-ai-boom-revi...

Thanks for repeating what the author explained.

Where did they say that?

Did they post the knowledge cutoff date somewhere

Yea I guess that's accurate but they also explained that AI capabilities advance every 6-12 months and managing a team of agents buys you a few years. So their proposed solution and conclusion that it keeps you safe for years makes no sense right now. Multi agent orchestration, with an agent doing the orchestrating, is all the craze nowadays.

The author gives this example of the problem and incorrect way to leverage AI:

"Sarah was relieved. She thought she could focus on high-value synthesis work. She’d take the agent’s output and refine it, add strategic insights, make it client-ready."

Then they propose a long winded solution which is essentially the same exact thing but uses the magical term "orchestrate" a few times to make it sound different.

“existence is a requirement to have morality. That implies that the highest good are those decisions that improve the long-term survival odds of a) humanity, and b) the biosphere.”

Those are too pie in the sky statements to be of any use in answering most real world moral questions.

Your original comment was:

“Humans aren't smart, they are really just good at appearing to be smart. Prove me wrong.”

You didn’t answer my question

That’s much older than when Zuckerberg founded Facebook. Also older than when Bill Gates founded Microsoft, Steve Jobs founded Apple, and Larry Page and Sergey Brin founded Google. We’re talking about running a tech company, not being a politician. Clearly there’s no need to be 50+ and have a bunch of “life experiences” to be successful.

If you don’t think humans are smart, then what living creature qualifies as smart to you? Or do you think humans created the word but it describes nothing that actually exists in the real world?

I disagree. I think one of the main reasons most companies still give their employees Windows machines and use Windows Servers to support those employees applications (ie Outlook and Office) is because most of the world has grown up using Microsoft Windows and Office at home. If there was another world where most people grew up using MacOS, there’s just no way MS would have as much market share in the corporate world.

How exactly do advertisers take fingerprints and translate that to targeted ads for each user?

“Humans are weird in a way that 'public school culture' tries to paper over.”

I went to a public school as did the vast majority of the world’s population today. Genuinely curious… Are you saddened by what you view as a lack of diversity and creativity in the world and do you blame that on public schools?

Schools have athletic kids and within that, groups interested in different sports. And within each sport, subgroups of kids who become close friends. All of that also applies to kids interested in musical instruments, art, computers, board games and on and on. Some kids are nice, some are assholes, and everything in between. You make it sound like public school systems output an army of clones. No. Your friend group changes over time as you meet others, as your interests/views change, and as other people change. You're constantly immersed amongst all the other groups and you learn to tolerate some, love some, and hate some. All of this learning is tremendously stifled if you’re talking about a kid learning to socialize in a group of 5 instead of 500.

Aside from individualism, there has to be conformity as well. That’s part of learning to socialize and function in the real world for later as an adult. Conforming is also just human nature stemming from wanting to be accepted in a group. We all naturally learned to balance conformity and individualism when we were thrown into the public school system. By home schooling, you’re saying no, I don’t have the confidence that my child can do it on their own, even if 99% of the world has done so.

Everytime I see these kinds of arguments, it sounds like someone desperately trying to argue that a park playground is almost as entertaining for kids as an amusement park. Your example of 5 kids socializing with each other is definitely better than 1 kid at home. It’s also definitely worse than learning to socialize in a school of 500 kids each day. This is undeniable unless you have an argument of how a pool of 500 kids would somehow have less diversity of personality, thought, languages, physical features, intelligence, etc.

I’m surprised they released something so underwhelming. This will take zero market share from existing browsers.

Yep. Now I need an AI to help me use AI