sigmar
No, a lot of people like Gary Marcus said it had specifically already ended in May/June. Why is this time different?
>Tokenmaxxing is over. https://finance.yahoo.com/sectors/technology/articles/tokenm...
>Tokenmaxxing is dead, long live valuemaxxing https://www.ibm.com/think/insights/tokenmaxxing-dead-long-li...
>Token Maxxing, April 2026-May 2026, RIP https://x.com/GaryMarcus/status/2057610132742156603?lang=en
Evidence? I was told by a lot of people that token use was going to start to slow down 5 months ago because of "the end of tokenmaxing."
openrouter still showing weekly token usage higher than ever: https://openrouter.ai/rankings
What do you expect for FY2027 revenue to confidently conclude this? not saying you're wrong, but considering the dramatic changes in their revenue you seem strangely very certain that you know where it will land.
I've never listened to the Zitron's podcast. But does he present himself as a financial expert? I've heard so many people that seem to think he is a financial wiz and use him to inform investment decisions.
If I stand on a train track, do you think the police aren't allowed to ask me to move?
I'd like to extend this quote from Stephen Jay Gould:
>I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops [and driving cars to deliver burritos]
that isn't what the policy says. It isn't just about writing the report.
> If you use a chatbot to give you advice on a comment on the issue tracker, that comment is unwelcome.
There was someone on a previous thread about zig who reported a bug and was ignored, ostensibly because he used LLMs to confirm the accuracy of his bug report before submission. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49938732
Not saying it couldn't happen in the future, but we've got to be circumspect about that narrative after almost 2 years of it, no?
I've definitely seen LLMs compose jokes with this structure a lot where "whatever the hell ___ is" is in parenthesis. Not saying this is AI generated tho
>as bad as things have gotten in the past 4 days, they are going to get a lot worse before they get better. security leaders, never let a crisis go to waste: please go to your boards and ask for help right now. not for ai, for the basics. (we need to hold on for ~18 months.)
I don't think the two authors were told about a super secret mission.
why not? if we're at the point of byte perfect recomp of system firmware+games, surely we could find a patch that would fix that in both pcsx2 or this project
>chatbots and agents and other tasks may increasingly be handled on PCs and phones and smart glasses...
To me this article seems poorly researched. Agents aren't just a new version of LLMs. They're proactive and persistent. I love how my agents watch commits and rewrite my projects as new upstream features become available. I like how my agents will check pricing to look for deals and watch for new listings on Facebook marketplace. None of those things will ever be happening constantly on my phone. Phones, by design, aren't persistently active. Think the author ignores all that when they envision a future where agents increasingly run locally.
Medicine has never required that the method of action for a treatment be fully understood. Our current regulatory framework only checks for safety and efficacy because we've never formally understood everything going on in the body. Seems like a difference between "hard" science and the clinical/engineered implementation.
Before LLM-assistance there were barely any fully playable recomps.
How many recompilation projects have you helped with? I get annoyed with non-contributors complaining about the people that contribute.
...
>So, no, I will not be sending Sam Altman a bottle of whisky anytime soon, nor I am planning on spending my time reading through that paper and trying to make sense of it.
Think about a hypothetical circumstance where we get radio communication with some aliens on another planet. They send over tons of math to help us advance our tech, we know the math they're sending us is correct, but their explanations are really hard to work through because they aren't humans and the math is so different from anything we've done. Should we whine about the results they sent to us and refuse to engage with it?
gift link didn't work for me, and is this poorly phrased? because it seems implausible that OpenAI doesn't typically include revenue from their models being used on AWS. Perhaps the "gross up" is referring to how the number is included? like Anthropic was using the value pre-removal of revenue sharing and putting the revenue share subtraction as a separate expense?
[not a finance guy so someone tell me I'm wrong if that's not a plausible reading]