TSiege

I overall agree with you, but I'm certain google could just disable the AI summaries on top in these scenarios instead

the irony that this argument was made by an AI account is now being copied to argue against the value of the company responsible for making it

Any sources on training costs in free fall? My understanding was training costs are proportional to model size. Is it just that compute costs are falling?

Are the shortcuts for moving between tabs and spaces good? I can see the appeal of the sidebar and the split view is genuinely cool, but it's features, like glance, feels really cursor heavy. Clicking on a page and then going back to the search results is so fast with a keyboard or track gestures. I want fewer mouse movements not more.

In what sense did deno compete with cloudflare? It is a niche runtime and cloudflare is a cloud platform

Not only can you switch models easily, but their competition can easily duplicate their product. I'm not sure stickiness has been found yet, but my guess is being more of G-Suite for "intelligence" than being a token hawker.

The question isn't whether the market is big enough. It's whether at a race to the bottom on prices is sustainable and worth what investors expected it to be. The original story of OpenAI and Anthropic was that it was a race to super intelligence and whoever gets there first basically captures all the money in the economy. That kind of investment pitch means missing out not just on big returns but perhaps infinite return on investment. It seemed like it'd be true when the market was young and the cost to compete was prohibitive, but now anyone can compete with open weight models that are cheaper and maybe not the best, but are good enough.

You raise $200B to be a high margin low capex business, not an industrial commodity producer with high capex and margins being set by competitors who can duplicate your product and undercut you on price.

There isn’t a moat in the sense of self hosting but you need a reason for people who don’t want that to stay on your platform. Customers save time and effort managing payments easier this way. However it’s a race to the bottom price wise.

Going to be all about branding and platform stickiness for OpenAI to make investors and creditors whole.

The response to Jev should be the nail in the coffin over whether or not the AI business is a commodity market.

Out of no where Jev appeared as the next round of the price wars. Jev showed the value of System One models. A fast yes/no/confidence score not only is cheaper but also often all people want. Open source versions flood hugging face and now the big players are giving up a potentially big driver of output tokens to keep customers and race to the bottom price wise.

If I were OpenAI or Anthropic I’d be racing to make their products as sticky as possible bc ppl will flock to what’s cheapest otherwise.

Deleted. Thanks for the citation

Agreed. Ehlrich as well. He was a butterfly specialist and applied population theories he used in his own research onto humans. His book was a surprise best seller and made him an intellectual celebrity.

His article is heavy cherry picking and shows little curiosity beyond “you’re dumb I’m smart.”

All pros and cons of LLM coding aside, something has really shifted for me with the latest agentic coding. I’ve found my motivation to work slowly slipping away. No matter what role I had I always found something to keep me engaged with the job. Now though there’s no motivation. Every week it feels like my skills, talents, even ideas themselves are less and less relevant. I’m just meat shuffling data and permissions between bots

You’re just describing the exact situation we’re in but substituting a drone for a rifle. If the government is mad they should just partner with a contractor who is less concerned about this, which lo-and-behold they did it’s a company called OpenAI.

Anthropic isn’t a supply chain risk since they easy found someone else

I think part of the big push to "slow down AI development" is to add some sort of regulatory pressure that will give them sort cover to train less models and slow their burn rates

Yes I think they should be more direct. Not sure why they weren't

Are you implying that OpenAI using someones unpublished research without their permission to solve an career defining math problem with their latest model in order to publish first is a problem with the mathematicians?

My read on this document is that people's work isn't being fairly cited more than what does it mean to be a mathematician in this age.

definitely less than ideal

Foldable gimmicks aside the new materials and components sound really cool. How they have the screen layers that move freely seems innovative. The new ceramic they’re using for the outer shell/screen sounds great and I hope we see it in more of their devices:

“Ceramic Shield 2 on the outer display reduces glare and provides 3x better scratch resistance than the previous generation”

Yes Pangram rated it as 100% AI written

This is pseudoscientific AI slop. Pangram is scoring it as 100% AI written. Modern humans originated 300kya, so the idea that oral to written culture could date back 240k years is absurd.

Checking to see if these dates correspond to climatic events only makes sense if the texts imply that. However, this list does not mention climatic events for these kings records. The only climatic event it does mention is the great flood which in their chronology comes after these lists of kings. So why would these writers use dates to some past events and leave out that context? I don't see any scholarly articles suggesting this. Googling for it only brings up this article. It comes across to me as ploy for self promotion rather than anything of value to prehistory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_King_List#Lines_1%E2%...

For a real example of a possible ancient human record of an actual event aboriginal australians have oral histories of a volcanic eruption 37kya.

https://www.science.org/content/article/aboriginal-tale-anci...

If this was the case why do the kings that come after this on the list have normal human reigns?

The most likely explanation is that we are treating the list too literally. This list is at least 4000 years old and we do not have the cultural context to understand what it's intent was

I've used AWS Cognito for two start ups. One is still trucking. Cognito definitely leaves a lot to be desired, but overall I've never encountered any major issues with it. I think it's cheap precisely bc it's lackluster, but that's fine for my needs. YMMV I guess

They're also much cheaper from an infrastructure perspective to maintain

The case isn't whether or not this happens, it's whether or not the Facebook knew the about the harms and made decisions that were negligent at best or deliberate at worst

what’re your gripes with people wanting to buy a Mac for the OS and hardware? It’s nice to have things work out the box

The combined revenue of the SP500 ~$18.28T, or ~14.8% of global GDP in 2025 (~118.35T). So is anthropic really saying that they expect to have 1.64x the revenue of the SP500 or that the total addressable revenue for AI they suspect is $30T? That number is at least plausible but expect to earn 25% of global GDP is a bit whacky unless you've drunk a lot of koolaid

To those replying that it’s feeding starving children read the article. The equipment to do this isn’t accessible to poor fishermen. From the article, “While understudied, the incentives for the use of dangerous dynamite fishing are often falsely attributed solely to poverty and desperation. The cost barrier to buying boats, bombs, and detonators means it’s more likely a practice for middle-income fishers, according to experts.”

I’d argue this practice hurts poor fisherman more than helps as coral reefs are important nurseries for fish and reliable sources as well. Blowing them up will rob communities of shallow fishing grounds and future fish

If you read the article it’s pretty clear this is greed and short sighted thinking

> While understudied, the incentives for the use of dangerous dynamite fishing are often falsely attributed solely to poverty and desperation. The cost barrier to buying boats, bombs, and detonators means it’s more likely a practice for middle-income fishers, according to experts.

“A combination of factors drives blast fishing, including ineffective enforcement and management,” said Hampton-Smith, highlighting how indiscriminate the explosions are, killing all manner of species, regardless of age, size, or intent.

I think describing what's happening "other countries seem to sit on their hands and happily outsource every bit of manufacturing to a single country" is disingenuous. It's been dubbed China Shock 2.0 and it's being taken very seriously by the EU. The US admin is a joke and too busy shooting itself in both feet to have coherent policy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Shock_2.0