whiplash451

Why inefficient? If Claude continuously makes the system more efficient based on demand, there's no reason for the system to be less efficient than if it was managed by humans.

I am with you and wish you were right, but good luck forcing Meta to change the key dark design patterns of their products (correctly identified by the regulators as "highly personalised recommendations, autoplay and infinite scroll")

This is a step in the right direction, though. It will be a long journey.

You pay your taxes to Lightspeed?

https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/73150/Teller_...

ICRA, 2010

dang does not scale. It’s on us to make this place how we want it to be. Every comment matters

negative feedback - and dismissive feedback - is something you need to be prepared

OK. Let's RFM: first line = "Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes."

So, no, it's not HN-OK for rude & unfounded feedback to make it to the top comment.

Even if the website is "bad" (i.e. those 30 papers were never linked to Ilya etc.), the proper way of handling this is to call it out in a neutral way.

We might be over complicating things here.

The governments’ focus might be on protecting genuine users (adults or not), not fighting fraudsters.

In other words if ZKP works for the vast majority of technically illiterate people with their EU ewallet, the job is done.

That sounds like a lot of complexity for the average user.

Aren’t there fees to convert fiat from/to crypto on both ends?

You can buy the companies making up the index instead of the index itself.

It was proven to be a good strategy on the SP500 [1, 2]

With 500 companies, it's work. But you can probably approximate it with a top 100.

[1] https://rodneywhitecenter.wharton.upenn.edu/wp-content/uploa...

[2] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0015198X.2023.2...

At this point it might be about talent.

He could raise and build his own company. But the ability to attract the level of talent that Google/Anthropic/OpenAI have is a different story.

Maybe because they know where things are going with Gemini (more ads to your face) while Anthropic might, for once, have a different story.

When personal finance is not the bottleneck anymore, the new criteria becomes "vision" and "stacked talent".

"weak" in what sense?

Not something I would pay for to use outside of work

You wouldn't but apparently your employer would.

I don't disagree with you on robotics, though. For an empire like softbank, not buying an "insurance against the rise of robotics" also seems like a mistake to me.

That being said, they may expect robotics to rise through self-driving cars (hence their investment in Wayve).

How does Lerobot prevent « full control » and « understanding »? I thought this was an open source library.

I am not an official supporter of the library but am asking out of curiosity.

This could be of interest to you: https://thealliance.ai/projects/tapestry

Why are we even allowing this in Europe? These smart glasses are just plain data collection and surveillance in plain sight. When does the nightmare stop?

Not if the model is part of a broader product that happens to be very useful/relevant to private companies willing to pay a lot for it (e.g. a coding agent that can do many things but won't help you build a frontier LLM model).

My intuition is that Claude and the likes are going gung-ho after this, along all the verticals that will generate money without threatening their moat.

The moat looks deep today but it's going to become more shallow every year.

Unless the frontier labs start nerfing their models, which is exactly what seems to be happening.

The counter-point to your argument is a future where less and less un-nerfed open-source frontier models exist. Sure, China/Meta might keep commoditizing their complement by releasing un-nerfed models, but these come with their own limitations too.

I am worried that the door to great open-source frontier models might be closing by the day now.

it takes O(10) people to build one of these things

To build a working prototype, sure. To operate at production scale, definitely not. The same rule would apply to WhatsApp and many other world-scale products. Turns out that, the moment you need to monetize these machines, your O(10) stops working.

The TRM architecture models both the problem and the solution at the same time. You might find it an interesting read.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.04871

You might be missing that those rare humans were sitting on tons of failed or somewhat useful discoveries made by more “mediocre” humans that history forgot.

To a large extent, the onus is on the teacher to generate interest. Most teaching until uni is mostly forced upon students.

Gmail has become unbearably slow over the past year.

What used to be instantaneous (like, opening an email) now takes seconds.

Google, what happened to you?

it costs around 27$ a year per user for Meta to run the business

And a lot of this is probably spent maintaining the ad machine

Maybe because distilling small models from bigger ones that you control gives you better small models than fine-tuning from bigger models you don't control?

(I am not claiming it is the case, but stating this as an assumption)

Companies don’t care about it but governments certainly do.

Over the past 150 years, the work week dropped from 70+ to 35h in France.

Granted that’s a long time horizon but still.

The point is that we should be directing our energy in a direction that’s net useful for human kind which should translate into growth. Dropbox is not one of those because there are many viable alternatives.

You are also reminded of the same dichotomy when you (the renter) get a letter from your landlord asking you to leave the premises you’ve liked a lot for the past few years.

This is already a solved problem for the class of customers they are going after.