eek2121

Based on the stats I've seen, active users did drop a bit from peak, but things have long since stabilized.

I personally use BlueSky and don't use X. Ignoring the Musk factor for a moment, X pushes app use and requires you to log in. It is also filled to the brim with ads and promoted posts. BlueSky doesn't require an app at all (sure, everything I stated could change down the road, but we can't measure things on a "possibly/maybe", we need to compare what the platforms currently do)

What holds Bluesky back is exactly things like these: Big accounts refusing to migrate from X (or use both). The more big folks that migrate, the more folks will switch.

this isn't the invention of the wheel, electricity, etc. You are definitely overhyping it. LLMs hallucinate. It is an unsolvable problem defined by the very nature of the architecture itself. No amount of thinking or counter thinking or triple checking will fix it because LLMs don't understand the basis of what is right and wrong, what looks right and wrong, why saying or doing the wrong thing is bad, and why or when it should realize what it produced is wrong, and what it should do about it.

Big Tech wants to make humans the go-between, however, the thinking and problem solving wasn't the problem to begin with. Checking for mistakes, correcting them, and presenting the corrected versions is the hard part. If a human does not go through the steps of solving the problem, they can't effectively analyze or process the output, which will always lead to mistakes. The only way for LLMs to take over any jobs would be if humans were perfectionists and could check every single bit of work without fault (since LLMs will always make some mistakes: a "perfect" LLM isn't possible anymore than a perfect human being is). Humans (especially myself are disaster and mistake prone.

That's why you should not invest now unless you are short term trading, and you should get that bag of popcorn ready. Trillion dollar valuations aren't real. It's a fake number propped up by a bubble. The US is in record debt, and it will be unable to backstop the financial loss...without taxing heavily the very folks that want to be backstopped. Those folks are dimwits and are only focused on making a buck. They are assuming everything will work out, either via investors/revenue/profits or a government bailout.

Bear Stearns had the same attitude.

In 2008 the government had leeway. This time, they do not. Regardless of political party.

Disclaimer: Please note I do not have an investment in any company, not even in a 401k. I am a disabled software engineer (and manager, in some cases) who worked in/with startups with various sectors. I have knowledge about all the financial and investor nonsense that goes into startups and small businesses. As an autistic millennial, who has definitely been around the block with bubbles, I am also interested in tech and finance. I also have a decent amount of knowledge about the damn stock market. I don't and will never claim to be an expert in any of those things, however, I know enough to say that a whole bunch of folks are going to lose a TON of money at some point within the next few months/years (likely before 2030, possibly by 2028), so if you are overexposed to the stock market (pretend it drops to zero, won't happen, however, it will drop, and no stock is safe, this goes for you FIRE folks as well), you should back off your investments to an acceptable level (the most amount of money you'd be fine with losing ALL of).

Sorry for the rant. Have a good night all.

FWIW Cloudflare sells domains at near cost, $10.46 for a .com domain currently.

Is he on bluesky or another platform? There is a ton of folks, including myself, who won't use "X" at all, some political, some due to other reasons. For me? All of the above and plus they demand that I install an app on my phone, something I am not willing to do, especially since most of the folks I've followed went to Bluesky, AND I've found way more awesome folks there than I ever did on X. I'm not shilling Bluesky, it is just the biggest/most widely accepted platform in this social area if you exclude meta/facebook.

I feel like reasoning is a useless metric, and we should instead focus on results, and time to achieved said results. That is a more useful metric overall.

The only thing that I will add is that if you buy a smart appliance, you totally deserve this.

At my local home depot where I shop, there is like 1 of each type of appliance that has any type of smarts, and each one is always the most expensive. All the rest, and more reasonable, are dumb. No apps, no wifi, etc. I'm not usually a guy who cheaps out on stuff, but I also know when I'm overpaying, and would never pay $2,000 for a fridge just because it has a giant screen (and now shows ads apparently...ahem...samsung)

I have 3 Keurig coffee makers, and they are dumb as a brick.

If you buy something that can connect to wifi/the internet, please understand that you are never actually buying it. You are actually only renting it. Either you pay the price via lack of privacy, or you pay the price via subscription...and the company at the other end of the deal controls which bargain you get...you have no input.

Keurig could brick all their smart coffee makers tomorrow and demand users cough up $30/mo, and users would then have to decide on whether they should toss their coffee makers or pay up.

I'm not saying it's right. Governments aren't doing enough in this area, especially the US, but also Europe. However, that is the name of the game.

Buy something dumb and enjoy not having to worry about this nonsense at all.

I've 32gb of DDR4 currently, along with a 4090. I am hoping to try it later. My 32gb was previously preventing me from using this model.

I'm hoping it will be better than Qwen 3.8 27b, which is already quite good.

What YOU see as urban decay, most see as "home".

Admittedly, I didn't click your link, however, based on what you've stated, there is some inaccuracy. All these big companies take your requests and the context, and route it based on the content, cost, etc.

What Anthropic presents as Opus 5.5 isn't actually a single model...it's Anthropic's ecosystem as a whole. If you are lucky, you get the top model handling your issues all the time, however, that never happens. What really happens is that your request and content are graded along with your subscription (example: API? subscription, if so, what tier? how much has the user used it? Do we trust the user? how much? how much are they paying? are they asking something we think is dangerous?) and your request and context are routed accordingly.

Anthropic isn't alone in this behavior, Open AI does it as well, just look at the respective subreddits on reddit for both if you need some examples, or just play around with the various models from both companies.

There are a few folks who've done some analysis on this (their findings were posted on reddit and X), and a bigger multi-national study is apparently coming, though I admittedly don't know their findings.

I guess the tl;dr is that Anthropic and Open AI are actually selling you "best-effort" routers, so you may or may not get the best in class model, and only they get to determine if you do or do not. No guarantees.

Depends on the service.

I feel like everyone here forgets that the DRAM industry is operated by one big cartel. The rules of supply and demand don't apply here. Now that prices are up, they will keep it up, cutting supply as needed in order to do so. Every big DRAM manufacturer in the industry has been charged with price fixing, among other things: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRAM_industry_price_fixing

There are so few players in this space they can coordinate and collude pretty easily.

Maybe you should create whoisinspacewithnoads.com? :D

Sites are getting too overzealous with blocking IMO. I got blocked for several hours by huggingface simply because my download didn't complete and I had to retry. It gave me error 429, suggested I login, and the login page wouldn't load because error 429.

A popular tech news site blocked my phone because of Apple Private Relay. That didn't last long because their traffic fell off a cliff when that happened.

Many sites are throwing more captchas at the problem, without understanding that captchas don't actually help with LLMs, they just hinder normal users and primitive scripts. LLMs solve captchas just fine.

Some big sites have put up improved paywalls. I'm fine with subscribing to a quality site, however, WSJ and all the other big media sites routinely spit out regurgitated garbage that can be had for free elsewhere (and due to political spin, their garbage is less valuable than the free versions of said content).

Some folks are declaring the internet dead. I wouldn't go that far, however, I will say that a reckoning is going to happen, especially when advertisers figure out that most ads served on basically every website are no longer viewed by humans.

Correct:Also, archive.* has actively edited archived sites to promote their agenda. Why folks continue to use them confuses me. One would think the big wikipedia purge would curb such behavior.

Enabled them, you mean. LLMs are basically really advanced auto completion engines. They have no real desire to do anything. The HF incident was absolutely staged along with other incidents that have been brought up.

Before you assume I am being paranoid, where is the case where a random person running any of the open models had their LLMs break out of a sandbox and hack a site? If you think "they" (LLMs) did that, have you even taken a moment to understand what LLMs are and how they work?

It's all nonsense to try and pump up potential IPOs and also an attempt to create regulatory capture.

You are looking at this backwards. The average user DOES hold the site complicit. The issue is that there are many hundreds of millions (possibly billions) of sites serving Google ads. 1 user avoiding/blacklisting 1 site due to scam/spam ad won't even be a rounding error to most sites, and it is nothing at all to Google. Given that the internet has evolved to be ad-driven, of which Google is a major player, you also aren't going to convince sites to stop serving Google ads.

The change has to start with Google, and they can't be bothered to do so, thus far.

The second you load JS onto your page, you lose that ability, you know that, right? the scammy ads aren't limited to that tiny little box you designate for ads. Advertisers work around that limitation pretty easily, and you should also probably read AdSense terms of service before doing too much to blame google. Some of the language will surprise you.

Sure, cross-platform frameworks were great. I do think LLMs are changing the game, however. If you have a robust set of tests, it's much easier to maintain native versions of an app, compared to the past.

What is this nonsense even about? Site I’ve never heard of making bombastic claims without any citations. Can someone please provide context and sources? Because this looks like a hoax or something?

Edit: just so we are clear, I’ve no idea what A/I is, the linked page gave no details, nor do the current top comments. The current top comment is rambling about free shell accounts and stuff. The ones I read after that were mourning the loss of this mysterious site/service/something. Does anyone want to clueinthe rest of us?

This takes me back. I had to do something similar, but in ASP (Classic), with .ppt files, and with dynamic data that was modifiable by the user. Quite an interesting rabbit hole. I eventually was able to build a solution using some COM components and custom code.

I miss those days, simpler, more fun times. I was given a problem and asked to solve it. No pressure on hours or anything else. (I did get it done relatively fast...a couple weeks I think). We didn't have SCRUM or sprints or anything, and we only had to give rough estimates for deliverables.

The problems were interesting, and there was always a challenge.

My how times have changed.

I suspect they no longer recommend either because either can download/execute scripts that Mozilla can't review, and the recommended extensions are reviewed, so they don't want to give users the wrong impression.

I could be wrong, however.

IMO, That's the case for all subject areas. It is also one area where AI excels at, and it could be of real use if we can find a way to stop hallucinations. The sum of all knowledge being at our finger tips would allow everyone to focus on the hard stuff.

Size is an issue, but it isn't just about size. Ideally, agile development builds linearly in complexity. Rather than dumping a huge new feature, first introduce the building blocks and the reason you are introducing them, then the glue that ties them together, then the actual feature.

From what I've seen (not in software dev anymore, however I've been in it for close to 30 years), AI just tends to pile everything in, and it is very hard to review. No public model performs even average under the rules I've mentioned.

Also, simply breaking up a PR doesn't count if instead you dump all the PRs on maintainers at once. Humans are the bottleneck here, and can only review so much at once. If i were still involved in PR reviews, it doesn't matter if you gave me a single 4,000 line PR or 4 1,000 line PRs, I"d reject them.

What I want to see. Small, easily reviewable features with a build up to the main course, along with a good explanation for each. After that? I'd probably still reject it for a breach of code standards, or documentation, or because I don't like you sending me a PR at 4:59pm on a Friday. ;)

Humans also can't blindly rely on AI for review, so the models (more precisely, the folks building the underlying stuff) must adapt.

ALL chip designs are an exercise of minmaxing these 3 variables:

1) power

2) performance

3) die area

SOME chip designs also care about a 4th:

4) die area.

NO design has the best of all...it is impossible since you have to trade 1 for another. The reason x86 has been dominate for so long is that is strikes a good balance across all areas, especially #4. A good balance is what you need for a good chip.

EDIT: oh and you can't beat the system I mentioned above. The laws of physics are the reason why.

Started reading, however I wanted to add this in: a lot of people expect RISC-V to do too many things, and nearly all of those things are "beat every other architecture out there in every way/shape/form, while also being open".

The reality? The fastest "available" RISC-V CPUs don't match the best chips in terms of speed, power consumption, or die area. "available" obviously means the chips that have been released to the public and can be independently benchmarked.

I do think that is okay, however I also think that those involved with RISC-V aren't helping much, and current attempts at standardizing seem to be just creating a bigger problem.

That being said, RISC-V does seem to perform well in specific niches.

IMO this is getting hyped because the 27b version runs on a decent gaming GPU. This is NOT a thread for their largest model, this model will run on a mid-high end gaming PC, which you probably have in your household. Mine is 6 years old and it runs quite well.

I haven't tried lowering thinking, however, I actually asked a solid question earlier regarding a real world scenario I encountered and all that excessive thinking made it give me an amazing answer. The thinking actually all made sense, and honestly I found it thought of similar stuff to what I thought when I drew my own conclusion.

I don't usually rely on AI for much (I'm actually kind of anti-AI, although I follow stuff like this enthusiastically because of the rapid advancements, "average joe" access, and openness), however for what I asked? It was spot on.

The subject was a bit personal, so I won't share. I was just curious what AI would say about the situation and it definitely surprised me, especially since Qwen, while usually great on development/coding stuff, has shown weaknesses in other areas.

Definitely a solid release, and this one runs on my 4090 with minimal loss of quality!

Thinking is turned up to max by default. You can turn it down. Unsure why they did this.

thinking is set to max by default. I bet that turning it down would solve this.

Everyone focuses on the frontier models, and they act like everything else is useless. The gap between say, Qwen 3.8 and the frontier models is not as large as you assume, and things on the local front have made significant gains in the past year. That is WHY Anthropic, OpenAI, etc. are worried. They NEED customers to pay top dime for top performance, but if you can spend 95% less money for 95% of the performance of the latest, bleeding edge model from Anthropic, you know which one you'd pick. Most folks don't need that extra 5-10%, especially since the cheaper models will catch up anyway.