mgfist
mgfist on Hacker News
HogLake is quite the name ..
Fabio is the son, Jair Bolsonaro is the past president.
This is a big part of my problem with crypto and why I'm bearish on it breaking through to normies. Traditional financial institutions just seem so much safer all in all, not to mention having far better UX.
> Please for the love of god, quit generating markdown files (especially having the LLM generate the file, because if it could generate it, it doesn't need it), quit generating "decision" docs, and stop having more comments than code.
I agree with all of this. But I disagree that code alone is enough to understand the why.
Idk I just can't agree. Code is the what but it doesn't tell you the why. There are so many times where at first glance the code seems suboptimal or bad or wrong, and it's only when you learn of some constraint somewhere else that it begins to make sense.
All code is written under constraints, and most constraints live outside the code.
Did you even read my comment?
Specifically this part:
> There's 1000 chatgpt clones but everyone still uses chatgpt. There might be 1000 jev clones soon enough but people won't switch unless there's something significantly better about it.
The fact that Jev will be cloned is exactly why brand and distribution matter even more. When 1,000 products do the same thing, you'll use the one you know.
I don't think you really read the comment. They specifically mentioned it for civil matters
All this means is that brand and distribution matters more than ever. There's 1000 chatgpt clones but everyone still uses chatgpt. There might be 1000 jev clones soon enough but people won't switch unless there's something significantly better about it.
It's also why Meta can make Muse and get a lot of users even though there's 10,000 personal agent startups
It probably will happen over time as entropy does its thing, but the structure is different than what you describe.
For one, Howard is not the successor, Greg Abel is. Howard is a Stewart of culture, but he is not the leader.
He also isn’t inheriting Buffetts fortune so the generational rot won’t be the same.
Next, both Greg and Howard have been at Berkshire for decades, and however is next up will likely be similar. So there is time to pass on the values.
Laslty, Berkshire is a decentralized company. The company itself has less than 50 employees. All of the companies they own have their own leadership structures and cultures, and Berkshire does not burden itself in managing it. This makes the successor problem a lot easier
Buffett’s giving almost all his wealth away so not the usual rags-to-rags.
The grandson has a pretty successful career already anyways (helped obviously by his relation to Warren)
Berkshire itself has less than 50 employees, so it's absolutely possible to do this.
Warren was CEO until 9 months ago. While yes, he's been chairman for 50 years, he's been an exclusive chairman for only 9 months. The role is ambiguous anyways and it's pretty obvious that someone else won't have the authority Warren has. And his son has been a director for 30 years so it's not like he's a new hire
> but to oversee their family's share in the enterprise
Not exactly, he's there to oversee the culture of Berkshire and ensure it's continuity. Buffett is donating all of his wealth (and has already donated $66B), so there isn't a fortune to protect.
Berkshire is an institution of sorts at this point, and requires strong stewardship to prevent enshittification (for lack of a better word).
Idk 512GB of (essentially) ram is pretty damn insane for a consumer machine
Yes but I don't think maintaining clones of SaaS products will be very easy. Maintaining integrations definitely gets a lot easier
Creating? Sure. Maintaining? absolutely not.
This is the only way. Gotta gaslight yourself into liking them lol
Lol I actually do see them in the dark. Not as much but still there. I've gotten used to them at this point thankfully
ChatGPT was the first place to really do it to this extent
> The primary goal of a start up is to grow as quickly as possible which is rarely benefits the public.
Why is that so? Fast growth, when achieved honestly, is a result of solving user pain that others haven't. Maybe you think so because users != the public, but I think in totality the public is a collection of users who all have needs they want met.
That was very fun, thanks for the link
The truth is that using AI well is a skill much like anything else. There's no one single way to use it much like there's no one single way to write a program that serves hackernews.
> The article doesn't touch much on why modern decor emerged as it did
The theory I subscribe to is a few fold:
1) People like to buy "generic" homes that are easier to renovate/personalize
2) But then they don't end up personalizing, because they're afraid to tank it's market value
3) Thus homes stay boring and generic
Both spectrums are hard. Solving last mile is really really hard, but if you do that's a huge moat (aka Amazon). If you avoid last mile, you best deliver value in some other way, which Costco does by giving you more per dollar than anyone else.
I don't think coding is solved in the way they claim, but certainly solved in some way for many people. I don't write code by hand anymore, everything is through claude/codex/pi.
Still requires lots of work to shape the output correctly, but it's still crazy to me that I literally don't write code any more. And in that way, coding is solved for me.
> there are plenty of places where machine learning algorithms make sense, but customer service is not one of them.
I don't care about human vs AI, I just want my issue resolved. Whatever does that the best and fastest. Or even better, for there to not be an issue in the first place.
I have my qualms with Anthropic/Claude but they've also had to scale unfathomably fast and that is just hard to do regardless.
> he is emphasizing that they used their own words against them. everyone knows the security threat is a pretext. the message is that he is smart and they are stupid and he won, which is what I call gloating.
In this case, the govt used Anthropic's word in the way Anthropic wanted them to.
Anthropic has publicly stated that AI is too powerful and needs to be regulated. They've done this repeatedly. More recently, they've withheld releasing Mythos claiming that it's not safe.
Sacks isn't using Anthropic's words against them. He's more or less doing what they asked!