thisisit

You do realise that you cannot prove a negative? So the right conclusion even informally cannot be “ probably not making me any dumber”.

This is a bad take.

Think about it another way. Consider how much money Microsoft spends on maintaining Excel. There are open source alternatives that have >90% of the functionality, they'll even work w/ Excel files and generate them.

Sure but were these open source alternative as pervasive and widespread and talked about when Microsoft was bundling Excel with the OS? Or were there millions of dollars, if not billions of dollars being spent by these competitors? The answer is No. It is not the same scenario.

While I understand the logic of harnesses - those are not full proof. It is trivial to setup K3 or Qwen to work with Claude Code/Codex by intercepting requests and routing to K3/Qwen. You have tools like CCSwitch which can do that for you.

The only thing remains is - people willing to pay a lot for slightly better model. That is true but price sensitivity is also a thing. The mania case for Anthropic/OpenAI/SpaceX/Google is that they will capture large part of the enterprise market. But in many cases outside coding AI capabilities will be resold.

That is instead of buying AI for lets say HR functions you pay for embedded AI in your HR software. And the HR software company will have incentives to raise their own margins. If their provide similar looking experience using Qwen/K3 why will they buy Anthropic/OpenAI. That is the real risk here. While as an individual you can continue to pay top dollar.

Taylor Sheridan can do a new series where a Ranch owned by a family for many generations is targeted by a Datacentre company.

More likely he is going to make something like Landman: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landman_(TV_series)#Renewable_...

story about a salt of the earth datacenter operator who manages the datacenter and people while spreading misinformation about the impact of datacenters on people.

you still need to poke around, figure out what you want, what to do, etc.

Is it different? because then:

you can even be vague, and they'll probably do an ok job if it's not something super complicated

That's lot of qualifiers to say maybe, should be possible - how does someone who is not a software engineer know what is complex, vague or ok. There are lot of assumptions to say - This time it is different.

It is entirely possible it is different but I am yet to find a convincing argument.

Current discussions is like deja vu. One time there was hype around of no code/low code development using PowerApps, Zapier etc.

The sell was - Creating your apps was easier than before. You don't need to know any programming language. You don't need IT. You have a GUI and just drag and drop and visual your apps. Just fill the fields and voila your app is ready.

The criticism of the approach was that low codes apps might not be secure, unsuitable for large scale and critical apps, and lead to increase in unsupported apps by "shadow IT".

The same reasoning exists today for AI coding. Anyone can create apps, its not great for complex and mission critical apps, might not be secure etc. And lots of discussion like your post parsing the future too closely.

Low/no code apps have continue to grow. But many of the low/no code tool users are developers who use it to make their jobs easier.

While some might say - this time it is different. I believe we are currently we are the beginning of the cycle so everyone is excited to use their PowerApps shaped Claude Code/Codex to make their 100th budget tracking app but as time passes and edge cases are figured out the biggest users for AI are going to be software developers (and I believe they currently are the biggest users).

As for software engineering jobs just like before engineers will be expected to output more and faster. This has happened with every innovation from assembly compiler to IDE to low/no code ways of building.

The different levels of expertise exists even today and it will remain so.

More like keeps "extending by 1 more week"

whataboutism is a tiresome argument.

Lets agree that these folks are wrong and ideally they should have petitioned 12 years ago. The question to ask is - for an admin which loudly claims to make America healthy again and talk about making everything chemical free etc - why can't they pass this? Is it because they can't score brownie points with base or they are overtly corrupt and do the same thing they accuse others of doing? Or that they know their supporters will not look at the validity of the claim and instead discredit people by asking whataboutism and party line questions?

Despite paying for Claude access, I don't use Fable but I find this always changing policy quite exhausting to follow. There is 2x usage, there is no 2x usage, there is 2x usage but only x hours, there is no 2x usage, there is Fable access, there is no Fable access, there is Fable access till x date, there is Fable access till x + y date. This is just exhausting. I just want to open and usage the default model and within limits. That's all I ask.

You missed two things one, a consist thread across all your examples - every market ends with a duopoly along with smaller competitors and two, which of these industries started with multiple billion dollars companies competing with each other?

Even if your case is that two companies in the AI group are going to survive and those will have healthy margins, others are going to suffer and compete on price. So saying “AI margins are going to suffer” is a fair industry wide statement. Maybe it’s not Anthropic or OpenAI or whoever you are thinking of but surely for Gemini or xAI etc?

I was worried this time last year that by this time this year, companies would have slashed their engineering teams down to a handful and everything would be driven by mostly autonomous agents with human guidance. But it just hasn't happened.

Amara’s law: We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run.

This continues to be applied to AI where people think is going to be next 12 to 18 months. Changes are coming but certainly not at the rate Zuckerberg and most people are thinking.

I was just about to comment the same. It’s like a hammer in need of a nail. Here’s where ChatGPT released and jobs dovetails so it must be true.

It will also be interesting to see 2019 through 2021. There was a glut of hiring post COVID and companies have to think about every dollar they spend post ZIRP.

It can tell you what’s on the screen at given point in time. My pipeline is mostly around simple questions like “does this video contain cars?” Not sure if it can spot charts on screen.

Exactly this. Gemini is best at this. Just give it video link - YouTube works best - and it will analyse the video.

It might come as a shock to you then that running government or military or any government service requires “somebody else needs to pay for them”. Let’s get rid of those too. Long live anarchy.

Fact is people who spout this nonsense are simply selfish people with “F you, got mine” mindset. They hide their selfishness in garb and call others socialist.

They're covered under CICP, which is more stringent and has paid out one person $6 million, and a few hundred grand spread out between some dozen others.

This is trying to play both sides. Appeal to emotion without having a rational thought process. Something bad happening is unfortunate and life changing. Then turning around and saying hundred grand isn’t life changing money for people.

What exactly is your remedy here - should people be not asked to provide proof for the harm and paid 10s of millions for every case? People have been asked proof for lesser things and paid even lesser for much bigger harm.

My friend who was diagnosed, by multiple doctors in two hospitals with Myocarditis caused by the vaccine has yet to receive any money. It ruined his career.

Anecdotal evidence is not evidence of systematic wrongdoing. At least I wouldn’t expect to see on HN but here we are.

Also, the manufacturers can never be held responsible, because they have legal immunity for the COVID vaccines.

There is remedy against vaccine harm: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Vaccine_Injury_Compen...

This was passed in response to claims against DPT vaccine and manufacturers stopping production of the said vaccine. Lawmakers feared loss of herd immunity and passed the law. Now vaccine skeptics say this is not enough and claim inability to sue the company directly as an issue - but what they really want is enforce their minority view on the majority by suing companies and ensuring no one has access to vaccines - tyranny of the minority.

The same person is not going to give you three different answers within span of minutes. Especially when nothing fundamentally has changed. People might or might not update their views depending on their biases.

At least in my company the CFO came back after talking with other CFOs and then used Lovable to build an app. He then mentioned to his immediate team who then picked it and started running with it. It is now one of the yearly goals. The fun part is when it came time to put money where their mouth is they say the company has no funding. So more FOMO.

The bias will come from your prompt. Asking AI - If voting for Reform UK is a good/bad idea? - shows AI where you at and what sycophantic it needs to give. AI is certainly not biased :)

America industries used to play by the same rules. Look up Samuel Slater.

Only images or videos as well?

There are also people who think AI is magic. I have often heard - "we want to use AI to automate processes but we don't have full documentation about the processes, we hope AI can help". Despite being told that no one can create outputs from thin air - every AI topic turns into the same discussion.

Often the solution to create those document to feed into these AI automations? Use AI. Its like ouroboros. Create docs using AI, then summarize and ingest using AI, explained by AI.

Same thing is going to happen with code. Create 1000s of line of code using AI. Then explain it using AI etc.

Ah the whatabboutism strikes again. You talk about X but what about Y?

The sad reality is people have lost the ability to counter the argument and instead counter bias.

Here you instead of countering what was being asserted that this government has knowingly involved in lot of bad faith argument - and there are so many of them - another one is Trump Kennedy center fiasco - trying to muddle the argument with "but LW also does it too" and have no factual argument.

Lets assume LW are the biggest liars in the world and gaslight people. What then? How does it change what is happening here? Just because one party is guilty doesn't mean other is clean.

It is no longer about making good faith claims in court. It is all about RW media dog and pony show. They can make provably false claims in the RW media with - "Do you want China to overtake US in this race?" and still garner support. And even if they lose they can paint the judge as leftist etc. so they have stopped bothering with even trying.

That's the number AI boosters are spreading too "The TAM for AI is all of humanity - this includes every person and every company. So, imagine this huge pile of future revenue." I agree that TAM is likely huge but is SpaceX most suitable to capture that TAM? Unlikely. But for now everyone wants in on the AI hype train and FOMO of losing out one any company in the AI space.

In the long term most markets are duopoly with small competitors. And personally I see OpenAI and Anthropic duking it out rather than SpaceX.

Grok has its own CLI tool called Grok Build: https://x.ai/news/grok-build-cli

There is some misunderstanding of what a crash really is. It doesn't necessarily mean that things get written down to 0 or some arbitrary level because everything has a price at which someone will buy.

Even companies have some value after a crash and you could make a case that at some arbitrary point it was worth $x and since the crash didn't cause the company to crater to below $x it has not "crashed". Even companies filing for bankruptcy have some residual value above what they might have been founded on - it doesn't mean the company hasn't gone bankrupt.

We always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur in the next ten.

Every new generation changing technology is followed by a frenzy of infrastructure build out.

Running up to the dotcom bubble lot of money was spent on building undersea cables and Internet infra because the assumption was that the demand for websites was going to be a straight line if it not exponential. There was an over capacity of expensive infra. Then the market crashed and the same infra went for cheap and laid foundation for Internet as we know today.

Same thing happened during the railroad frenzy in the 1800s.

And same thing is happening today. There is assumption that the pace of AI improvement and demand is going to be straight line if not exponential. So lot of money is being spent on data centres looking at “future”. There is going to be an oversupply of expensive hardware and models because who doesn’t want that sweet AI money.

Sooner or later the market is going to reset because nothing can keep going up forever. It’s only after the reset we are going to see the upsides of AI.

Its not only RAM. I have seen people who are vibe coding their app and instead of choosing Vercel as default they are learning about dedicated server hosting, docker etc and moving to providers like Hetzner. This is why whenever someone says - with AI everyone is going to write their own SaaS, I am always like - and what happens to hosting? Even Vercel might increase their costs if that comes to pass.

The whole thing is theatre.

Anthropic gets into argument with US government over model usage -> Release a model calling it too advanced for safe use -> release the model to public knowing well that this admin has thinnest of skins and will do something

Regulatory capture in roundabout way. Now it is going to take crying wolf over other companies/countries developing “Mythos grade model” to kick off action especially in next two years of this admin.

Companies will keep improving models because AI is not yet fully there. But it is incredibly naive to think governments were ever going to allow state of the art technology to be released to public or do things this publicly. Every company wants to show off and get publicly restricted because it shows off their strength.

I can only say well played Anthropic.