nkohari

I can't help but be skeptical of this, but... damn.

No one's going to come out and admit that they're just stamping LGTM on every pull request because they can't bear to review another net 2,000 lines of AI-generated code. The problem is that right now the tools we have for code review were designed for a world where code was cheap.

That site is AI slop with a bunch of questionable nonsense. For example, they suggest that Devin, Cognition's product, shut down. I'm not even sure where they got that information.

This was something I personally struggled with for a very long time, so much that we ended up abandoning the product we were working on to build a solution:

https://theseus.dev

Basically, Theseus reads your pull request and your codebase, categorizes the kinds of edits that were made, and writes human-readable documentation that describes what changed. Then, it shows the explanation side-by-side with the code, but presented in a way where you can decide what you want to skim and what you want to deeply review.

I don't think engineers should have to choose between wading through thousands of lines of slop and just smashing LGTM on every pull request. The problem is that the tools for code review are built for an age where code was expensive to write. Now that code is cheap, we need to start experimenting with tools that allow us to stay in sync with what's going on, while also not needing to review every single line individually.

What you're actually saying is that network effects are strong. Those network effects are the only reason Wordpress is still so commonly-used.

But, that has very little to do with the work described in the OP. Maybe EmDash will fail to gain sufficient traction to have their own network effects, but in the meantime, doing moderation on plugins in their marketplace is still important work. Automated moderation to prevent abuse and malware is useful, and is orthogonal to the social proof you're talking about.

I mean, that describes pretty much every trade. It's not difficult to turn a pipe wrench, but a plumber knows where and when to turn it.

Not only are they enabled by default, you can't easily turn them off. I turn the features off, and every time the firmware updates, they miraculously somehow turn back on. I finally gave up and disconnected the TVs from the internet and put an Apple TV on them instead.

Well, yeah. Corporations aren't just nefarious evil entities, dumping carbon into the atmosphere for no reason. They're doing it to sell goods. The problem is that a lot of the environmental costs for the manufacture and transport of those goods are externalized and go unpaid.

It's difficult to put the blame for that on the consumer, who has no visibility into manufacturing or logistics, and who has vanishingly-small options for not participating. Buying domestic goods is very difficult or impossible, and goods which are manufactured in more environmentally-safe ways are significantly more expensive (because the costs I mentioned earlier weren't externalized).

If a consumer is presented with two options, one that costs $X and has unknown environmental costs, and one that costs $2X and is marketed as being environmentally safe, the majority will choose the first. This is especially true as economic forces continue to squeeze average people.

Consumers absolutely participate in the problem, but the only process by which it could be corrected is regulation, and the only entity capable of that is the government. (Democracy being what it is, you can however place more blame at the feet of voters.)

Governments and industry are responsible. Personal consumption/waste is not the primary driver of climate change, no matter how much corporations tell us that using paper straws is the solution. It's tough to expect average people to take major action when corporations are essentially given carte blanche.

Not yet, sorry. We're still gauging interest on Windows to figure out when to prioritize. We're definitely planning to ship it, just not sure when.

You over-estimate the amount of sway investors have on Stripe. If VCs had the influence you're describing, Stripe would have gone public many years ago.

I worked on developer experience at Stripe for a few years.

What really happened is that Stripe's products used to be simple. If you're only accepting credit cards and only serving the US market, the API surface is extremely simple. Once you start going multinational and accepting different types of payments it gets much more complex.

For example, OXXO gives users a barcode and lets them take it to a physical location and complete the purchase, so instead of a system like Visa which can confirm a transaction in a maximum of O(seconds), you also have to support methods where confirmations take O(days). Building custom API endpoints for each payment method isn't realistic, since there are hundreds worldwide, and merchants want a single integration point that can support anything from credit cards to coupon-based systems like OXXO.

TL;DR -- Stripe's APIs are definitely more complex now, but it's not because of poor design, it's because they simply have to be in order to serve the customers and markets the company is now reaching.

It's an obvious partnership because Void Cloud was built on Cloudflare anyway, so having Cloudflare buying them directly just means that both companies don't need to carve out their own margin. Cloudflare is also happy to fund the work on Vite, Oxc, et al. while also having a more direct answer for Vercel and Next.js.

With all that said, I don't think we can extrapolate that their business wasn't doing well or that they couldn't have raised more money. Cloudflare probably just offered a good enough deal that it didn't make sense to try to grind it out.

What I really mean is that when M&A happens, it seems like a lot of people think the acquirer is the only one with any agency, and that's not true at all.

It is by choice, though? VoidZero was well-capitalized and could easily have continued to raise money for the foreseeable.

Can you explain how that would happen? This tax is limited to second homes only.

> Marketing and innovation produce results; all the rest are costs. Applying this broadly to most firms today you can divide this up into:

> 1. The producers and marketers (PMs/Sales). [...]

> 2. The leadership (CEO/VPs). [...]

I'm sorry, what? Product managers are producers and executive leadership are innovators, but engineers are just waste?

It's really insulting to the Stainless team to dismiss this acquisition as some sort of chess move against OpenAI. Give me a break.

I don't think it's fair to consider writing an analysis (even a favorable one) about a topic as _shilling_ for it. It's not like he was pushing shitcoins or minting NFTs.

I have always been (and remain!) bearish on crypto but it absolutely was something that couldn't be ignored a few years ago. Even if you came to the conclusion that it was bunk, there was significant enough fervor that any technologist needed to reckon with their position on it.

For example, lots of engineers proclaimed very loudly that document databases would replace the RDBMs, or that GraphQL was the future of APIs. They were wrong, as it turned out, but only with the wisdom of hindsight.

In my defense, I had entirely forgotten GME is/was a meme stock. It's been many years since I spent brain cycles thinking about WSB.

We tried Chromebooks for our kids, and the instant I could buy Neos I did. It might just be that we're fully bought into the Apple ecosystem, but I had a hell of a time trying to get stuff like parental controls figured out on ChromeOS.

I agree, but he had to know he'd be asked the question, right? And he had to know that staring blankly and mumbling about the offer being on the website wouldn't suffice as an explanation. It's just mind-boggling behavior from the CEO of a public company.

I have absolutely no clue how you could watch the interview and come away with this conclusion. The purpose of an interview is to ask Socratic questions to allow the guest to talk about something of which they have intimate knowledge.

The CEO made it seem like he himself didn't know how the math for the offer worked, and even when presented multiple opportunities to correct that impression, he made no attempt to convince anyone otherwise.

That's not really true. We've used these for years to control our Hue lights, and they're fantastic: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07MMWH2YB

The prevailing theory is that Anthropic doesn't have sufficient compute capacity to support Mythos at scale, which is the real reason it hasn't released.

This is absolutely true, but it's also difficult to square the legal restrictions around cannabis while alcohol is freely available (and significantly more dangerous and habit-forming), and nicotine use is on the rise again thanks to vapes and Zyn.

(To be clear, they're all drugs, and they should all be used responsibly if at all.)

I used to work in a suburban supermarket during high school and college, first as a cashier and then as a frontend supervisor and payroll clerk. We had a security booth where you could watch security cameras, and it was literally never manned. Tapes were changed, but they were there mostly in case someone would try to rob the place. Cashiers routinely rang their own lunch up either as 99 cents or as bananas. No one cared.

Supermarkets actually factor breakage, theft, and spoilage into their books as "shrink", which averages between 2-3% of sales. There's no detective building a case, biding their time to bring down the banana bandit.

Although, modern self-checkouts have cameras on the scanner with ML-powered item detection, and they will alert the attendant if you incorrectly scan something that's sold by weight. (I've done this before on accident, fat-fingering the wrong PLU.)

I would bet large sums of money that Apple is waiting to make a hardware play. When there's a sufficiently capable and intelligence-dense LLM, they will bake it into custom silicon and ship "the first MacBook with on-device AI, powered by our new I1 chip". Imagine Siri being powered by an LLM running entirely on-device at 10,000+ tokens/sec.

Most consumer tasks don't require a frontier model, and (beyond the app store) Apple isn't interested in being a channel through which a frontier model provider like OpenAI can sell subscriptions to their own model.

The problem is that there isn't really an alternative. The discussion is still happening there and nowhere else. (Trust me, I've looked.)

I don't disagree with your general premise that eventually it'll just be rewritten, but I have to push back on the idea that Anthropic will be acquired. Their most recent valuation was $380B, and even if they wanted to be acquired (which I doubt) essentially no company has the necessary capital.