rglullis

If you *really* care, run your own inference. Everything else is just wishful thinking and/or convenience winning over self-sovereignty.

> What about when they can run entire firms themselves

That would mean the whole idea of free markets will be rendered obsolete, instantly destroying the idea that investing in Anthropic is sensible.

It doesn't matter how much they "continue to advance at a pretty rapid pace", if the economy has no actual demand for the new capabilities. Even if we accept the premise that LLMs can produce good code at scale now and automate most software development work, then what? As *an industry*, the bottleneck was that we needed people to write code, and that bottleneck has been removed since ~Opus 4.6. Where is the industry now bottlenecked which requires some significant quantum leap in model capability?

It is a lot easier to switch model providers than it is to switch cloud providers. And the open weight models from Chinese Labs make Claude a lot more of a commodity than any service provided by AWS.

> Most UK large companies had cafeterias in the 1980s now they don't and you have to go out to get lunch

And FAANG companies famously provide everything in campus (food, laundry, gym clubs) as perks. What's your point?

> Much cheaper to do non of these

That's a textbook example of the Doorman fallacy.

> It is much cheaper for a company to do NO training.

Only if someone else is footing the bill.

> If it has that is an obvious cost to cut.

When it costs tens of thousands per year, yes. If training became 10-100 times cheaper, "training" becomes as expensive per employee as the cost of offering cafeteria food or "gym memberships". Training would be on par of offering any other type of employment benefit, and you don't see shareholders asking for big companies to get rid of any of those.

> The results have been higher energy prices for European households.

Under state-owned infrastructure, you simply can never know the real cost of any of the services, because state-owned companies depend a lot more on subsidies that come from tax revenue than actual revenue from the service itself.

> Get rid of corporations rent-seeking on our infrastructure.

Get rid of corporations altogether. I firmly believe that any company (state owned or not) with more than 150 employees should be broken down.

> And when GP claimed education was expensive because it is done by the government

Not what I said. Read again.

This is just another way of saying that people go to school to buy access to the network, not for education itself.

Really?

Do we have 20 years already since people are allowed to set up a solar panel in their backyard and sell excess capacity to the grid?

Do we have 20 years where farmers can grow their own biodiesel to (at least) power their own machinery, or does the state giving them subsidies to let them keep growing vegetables, wine and beef without having to compete in the global market?

The way to solve this is not by giving the monopoly back to the state, but by the state enacting regulations thay allows smaller players to join the grid.

> Are trains running cheaper?

You are picking the textbook example of a natural monopoly as a way to argue against how free markets don't work?

> If private enterprise was really this efficient, and government was really that inefficient, we should have seen ample evidence for that by now.

Food. Consumer goods. Telecommunications services. Transportation. Clothes. All things that have gone down in absolute prices and relative amount of family income to be provided.

Education / Housing / Healthcare: all deemed "up to the State" and that takes increasingly more from people at ever diminishing returns.

We can have a long and serious conversation about how hard the Government should be involved in regulating these things, and how we could set up systems that ensure that these become universally available and not just for middle/upper class. We can even have a conversation about things that should be controlled by the Government even if it means a high cost to society. But to deny that things managed by the State are more expensive overall is a clear sign of ideological blindness.

It is the other way around. Education/Training is only expensive because it is subsidized by the State.

Seems like you read the first paragraph of my comment, but forgot to read the second.

Automation moves the bottleneck to the amount of available capital that can be deployed.

> without the human factor

Less and less humans will be needed to support these businesses.

> There is a reason no (successful) company ever said "we finished the app, now fire all the engineers and collect money forever."

1) software is very easy to get duplicated and commoditized. So the margins get tighter and tighter and companies with "finished software" will have less and less money to be collected. Big companies need constant reinvention not because customers need improvements, but to keep their lines going up in the chart.

Remember Skype before being bought by Microsoft? It was as close as I can imagine from being "finished". It could be run forever with a skeleton crew and they could be collecting a few millions of dollars forever for their service. Do you think that MS paid 7 BILLION USD because of the "finished" software?

They are not "run-of-the-mill", but they are still amoral.

They have more power and can be more damaging to society than most corporations, but they are not guided by any specific ideology other than "how can we get more money/power to ourselves?".

"Effective Altruism" is deeply ingrained in Anthropic's DNA and that makes them way more dangerous than any of the run-of-the-mill amoral corporations.

> From the reader’s perspective, there are a billion other articles they could be reading. Why should they read yours?

I'd rather read something that shows any resemblance of a personality than yet-another engagement/reach/marketability-optimized "article" that just follows all the established tropes and could be written by any drone or clanker.

There is no worse form of bikeshedding than naming pedantry.

It's easier to enjoy it if you don't see how the sausage is made.

I am definitely not having a blast at work with LLMs. Everyone in the team has become simple rubber-stampers for whatever the AI puts out. There are mountains of documentation which gives a false sense of understanding of how things work, but the code repository itself could have been written in Brainfuck and it would make almost no difference. And we keep getting told by management that this is fine. We've become simple janitors in the slop hall.

No. This is one of the many excuses that people employ to keep feeding the beast.

> most of HN is "empty calories".

Agree.

> why are you here?

For the parts that are not empty calories.

> The research also has implications for investigating treatments for SMA, ALS and other conditions affecting the brain stem.

Are you working on research for any of these? If no, then this article is just "empty calories" in your information diet. If yes, I'd assume (hope, even) that you wouldn't be hearing from this through some institutional PR piece.

> I'd have never clicked that headline nor understood why this finding is important

Does this finding change your life in any meaningful way?

And now you are even more dependent on OpenAI...

You didn't solve the problem, you are just trading pain points.

The Lime app (bikes and scooters) refuses to close down a trip if you enter an area where parking is forbidden or if the picture shows that the vehicle is blocking the sidewalk or pedestrian paths.

It will also 100% forward you a fine if they get one and their records show you were the last user who misplaced it.

If someone parks a car in an illegal area, it can and should be towed. Same for bikes. Part of the needed "biking infrastructure" is proper policing and enforcement.

It is perfectly possible to live in these places without cars as the primary means of transportation.