jeremyjh

Right - I misread your message. Yes they needed to avoid that storm and should have had chances to do so.

They report GAAP earnings, and explain why it is not the best method to understand their current performance. Do you think it is more meaningful to investors to use their convertible notes mark-to-market accounting and worry about a loss that represents "paying their investors what their shares are worth"?

Adjusted revenue figures are reported all the time for many different reasons, there is absolutely nothing special about this and I've not heard ANY financial analyst explain why GAAP is a better number here. You are salivating over a total nothing-burger.

Also, if you didn't hear, their Q3 results were spectacular and were included in an amendment today.

By definition, there is no ruling class in an egalitarian liberal utopia.

Cynicism about corruption is one of the most power tools wielded by the ruling class in any system. In general its one of the best ways to keep the smarter-than-average from posing any actual threat.

My brother was born in 1984 is Stephen. We have only ever called him by that name, Steve never stuck. At the time I thought Steven was the more common spelling already; but we were catholic and he was named for St. Stephen.

I don't agree they had no way to avoid this. Every accident is a chain of mistakes, gaps or mechanical issues. We don't know the whole story here, but I do know that planes of this class are not given up for dead when they hit a surprise weather system. If they are, that means they missed something earlier - weather radar was misinterpreted or a bad judgment call was made.

In the US, boys would abbreviate Stephen or Steven to Steve. Stevie only for a young boy.

I’m not sure what they are measuring here though - if it’s only birth certificates then I’m sure Stevie is dominated by girls for a long time.

The difference here is its just one guy, a coding agent, and a fever dream.

The mag 7 are getting direct or nearly direct revenue from AI inference. New money is pouring into that - it is not zero sum. Everyone else is getting internal productivity lifts that are matched by competition, and when they are deploying inference features they are usually ones their customers didn’t ask for and don’t value, OR that they expect everyone to have and are not a differentiator.

I think you are also correct that a lot of value is being wasted with projects that are developed impressively fast but that provide little value. It could be those are simply surplus personnel trying to add value or make people think they do.

It is not in any way a “query thing” in the same manner as PageRank, it was based on prior work in deep learning and it is irrelevant that Deepmind was purchased by the same company that was behind Google Search.

It’s pretty clear there are a lot of valid reports based on the large increase in backport commits cited.

What difference will that make if all their competition are doing the same thing?

Exactly. Oh great we can write RFPs 8X faster. Well, so does our competition and now our customers get twice as many.

While they are seeing some individual productivity benefit, a lot of that doesn't really impact the bottom line directly and all their competition are using the same tools.

This research is specifically NOT about tech companies. It is about the rest of the fortune 500.

If you are in software or IT at a non-tech company that is in the fortune 500, the impact of significantly better productivity may not be measurable in aggregate in the company's P&L.

In smaller companies I expect it could be more measurable because some of them really are using AI much more effectively across many functions. But we're finding it very hard to measure meaningful outcomes.

I did ask and what I found out is that this admin is having nationwide injunctions at about 5x the rate of the previous admin, with 50 through July 2026. Biden had 28 in his entire term. Trump 2 is on pace to blow well past the previous record holder, which was the first Trump presidency at 80 total.

Moreover, Trump has made public comments regarding treaty obligations and international law that makes it clear he has no respect for those things, and there are no principles he follows at all so no one can predict what he will do next.

Yes, that is the worst part about that letter. It destroyed a lot of credibility. It may have done more damage to public health than COVID - and in the long term almost certainly will.

They forgot the “don’t make any mistakes” part of the prompt.

Exactly, this is the takeaway. The agents are running everything, the humans have no idea what is going on.

They clearly aren’t the right team to be working on it. It’s best if someone else gives it a go.

The fact that they believed this product was anywhere near ready for a Jepsen test means they lack the judgement and engineering competence to credibly provide a database server. It doesn’t matter what their clanker does after they get the report and the tooling - they should have already had coverage for the vast majority of these issues and the fact that they now conform to a test doesn’t mean there aren’t MANY other product issues that will be discovered at the cost of their customers data.

People use the term to manage their cognitive dissonance. They do not want to put the work in to become educated, and do not want to admit that this puts them at distinct disadvantage in many ways that matter.

> far-left loyal dog

Is this how a 60-day old account has negative karma?

Maybe the problem is that your ideas don't withstand any academic scrutiny, since they aren't based on sound research or well-reasoned arguments.

No one knows how the US works anymore because the current administration doesn't follow laws and just makes it all up as they go along. It turns out the court system is too slow to matter: illegal tariffs just move to new illegal justifications when the patently absurd ones are tossed out after more than a year of using tariffs to drive inflation and stroke Trump's ego.

Please point me to the paper about the coding model that can continuously learn.

Oh my that is convincing. Yes, I've seen lots of this sort of thing. I believe you, a Twitter influencer is behind it. AI building AI systems for AI to build AI systems with.

Who are the people who are responsibly writing all this test code but declare loudly on Twitter that no one needs to read the production code?

Name one. Point me to one developer that actually works - themselves, not just in the same company - on a system with serious customers that demand correctness and is spreading that message on Twitter.

AI can absolutely improve the situation. It has helped find and fix bugs I have despaired of ever fixing. But it cannot learn, and it cannot understand things for you. And people outsourcing all their understanding to it absolutely could lead to existential disaster for a system at the heart of the platform. Coding agents write too much code and ignore existing patterns. This has been studied quite seriously and they generally write 2.5x the amount of code a human does when refactoring or enhancing code in a real project. When a very large system slips past a critical point of decoherence you really cannot put any certain boundaries on what kind of problems become possible or how long it may take to fix them.

Yes, there are responsible engineers using AI in innovate ways and making things both more productive and better. But there are A LOT of lazy executives, and lazy developers who are spewing a lot of slop all over the place.

Its already happening to classic infrastructure, small and medium size businesses. Absolutely anyone can summon a gremlin capable of exploiting stuff like this or the PHP thing last week. There are clankers probing this stuff all over the place within a day of it going public.

Good ones force themselves to do technical work hands on regularly, but will generally reach a level where they can't actually do that anymore unless they are really good at building management systems and delegating. For me it has happened in cycles over the last 25 years; after 4-6 years in management I refresh skills and go back to an IC role because I can't stand it anymore. I've done that cycle three times but I won't do it quite the same way again because its probably impossible to do without a pay cut now, and because IC don't write code anymore anyway.

This is both like forcing all IC to develop management skills but its also like the shift to cloud infrastructure or 4GL languages - we are never going back to the old ways and will be building everything at a different level of abstraction with a different span of control.