jampekka

You seem to assume a case where academics write papers by single shotting from one prompt. Of course such papers are useless, but this is not how I at least use LLMs to write. I iterate the text in thousands of turns. I do tend to type all the final text in the manuscript too, sometimes editing it in the process. My current manuscript's session has about about 50k input tokens by me in about 1.6k individual messages. The manuscript currently is about 8k words (11k tokens). In total the session has about 50M tokens.

One frustrating, and very inefficient, part of the (lack of) division of labour in academia is that everyone has to write. And academic text has very particular format and demads, and writing it is a skill of its own. It's like asking that every software dev should be also be technical writers and write production level user manuals and ad copys on top.

And a lot more things than the writing goes into the paper. Designing, implementing and conducting the experiments. Studying, visualizing and analyzing the data. Interpreting the results in light of theory and previous literature. None of these require writing in the sense of writing a paper.

I would be ecstatic, and be a lot less wasteful in spending grant money, if I could stop wasting time writing the research in papers, and instead dump a git repo with some READMEs. But at least for now I have to also write the papers, but with LLMs maybe at 2x speed and with a lot less bad output.

When I write using LLMs, each paragraph may have dozens of iterations. The prompt is a lot longer than the resulting text and probably not really understandable. I'm sure nobody would want to read those prompts.

Building products is a different skill than writing about them. And if you write just "back of the napkin" people will complain about it even more than about an LLM version. Writing polished content is hard and takes a lot of time and skill.

AA-Omniscience is done with search off though which is not necessarily very common scenario nowadays.

These are rather extreme cases. Very few of those who use benzos, tens of millions in US alone per TFA, will go on binges ever. Most problems are from the dependence caused by long-term prescription-level dosing.

What's wrong with it? Reads fine to me.

Lobbying others being banned from using AI for this kind of stuff due to bioterrorism etc is an excellent anticompetitive move.

I for sure don't love any of the oligarchs, but how is Zuck worse than e.g. Musk?

I think the point was that it was written by hand (in the pen and paper sense) as shown in the photo.

Could have used extra 1 centimeter to format the comment's list properly. :)

How do you know? Doesn't read particularly LLM written to me, and even if it is, it's quite well written.

The author has been blogging about this kind of stuff for over 20 years. I'd be surprised if they suddenly let bots autonomously spam their blog.

I'm continually impressed by the ability of humans to spam low-effort whining about suspected LLM writing in almost every HN thread.

What is this spam of generic comments about how Opus 5.5 is so great, with perhaps some anecdote? How is that discussing the submission?

I have no idea about Chinese pop culture, but it could be that for someone not familiar with it everything may be too unfamiliar for the differences to become appreciable.

For example I don't listen much electronic dance music (house, techno, trance etc), and whenever I end up in a club it sounds to me that its always the same loud thumping song playing. Those who go frequently do seem to find a lot of variation though.

Output for decisions have so few output items (not really tokens here) that they are negligible anyway. Jev hyping "free output" is almost lying by omission.

I did not eyeroll at every short, empty phrase stated with enormous confidence. :|

It was a pleasant, concise and informative read. I actually read it from beginning to end. Unlike many of the artisanal articles starting with how the author experienced the crema of the morning's espresso.

Seems to be slightly higher quality and substantially faster, although this compares remote API vs local deployment.

The prevalent idea of Jev's superiority in price, speed and accuracy seems to come from TypeSafe's marketing and their, I'd say even bad faith, benchmarking. In independent benchmarks the relative numbers tend to be very different.

https://github.com/Mushroom-Systems/lichen

You can get Gemma 4 26B A4B at the exact same token input price of $0.042/M. GPT-5 nano is not much more expensive at $0.05.

https://openrouter.ai/google/gemma-4-26b-a4b-it

Jev doesn't support images, so it's hard to compare this directly. But in general this approach beats Jev in its own benchmarks for accuracy and speed and is about the same price.

https://github.com/Mushroom-Systems/lichen

Empirically this approach is more accurate, faster and about the same price as Jev.

https://github.com/Mushroom-Systems/lichen

There are no DE features I'm missing from GNOME 3. GNOME 3 respects the majority of the users, and this entails not making it a mess by catering to the vocal minority who can't move on from Windows 95.

Gnome 3 is one of the best things to happen to Linux on Desktop, and a salient example of actually modernizing the desktop.

My bet is that it's a bot error, but of a rule based one.

"When evaluating the Intelligence Index, it generated 140M tokens, which is somewhat verbose in comparison to the median of 140M."

SmartTube

These problems were quite widely foreseen during the legislative process, and partly had already been exhibited by the earlier ePrivacy directive. I don't know whether it matters who's to blame, but my trust in EU being very effective in these fights in the future either is not very high.

> I am once again happy that the EU is fighting practices like these via legislation.

As long as you manage to navigate all the dark patterns and not accidentally give your "informed consent".

CLI is the era and likely gonna be until some more LLM/AI-focused interfaces appear, and they are not gonna look like human UIs. There's a reason all models use bash and code, not a GUI shell, for their internal sandboxen.

Making LLM/AIs use mouse and keyboard makes no sense. They are a human interface tailored to human strengths and limitations, and arguably even for humans CLI is a superior interface for many tasks.

I struggle with it too, but my rule of thumb is that "the" signals the reader they should know what specific instance is referred to, whereas "a" introduces a new instance.