jstummbillig

7 ms·

31.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
Mirrors my experience with their airfilter/fan combination: Sounded smart with glowing reviews; ended up being loud, with horrible whining noises, on top of horrible aesthetics and being very expensive.
32.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
The thing that would change it a lot is that people would start trading away their GPUs, because some people would get vastly more economic use out of them.
33.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
That would support my notion that one is a fundamental block/lib for the other thing, and not really comparable. Am I wrong?
34.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
"Going into that two-way voice mode" How does that work in codex? I know the dictate function, can't find anything else.
35.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
As someone who ever used either: Are they comparable? I thought of them very differently, Pi more being, idk, a codex-light like thing and OpenClaw being this continuously running machine, doing stuff without your explicit prompting, ingest
36.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
Mostly, the law is not creating the right incentives. In this case in particular, I don't think it's so much a matter of speed: I suspect the current US admin would still sow the chaos they do to the same degree if it was ruled il
37.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
That looks roughly like a service being hammered by AI agents starting 2025, with no discernible connection to a 2012 acquisition by anyone.
38.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
What happened to GitHub?
39.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
That seems like a very lame claim, given that Social Media is data in abundance by design, and for at least 2 decades now.
40.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
I find it fascinating how spotty the evidence around "Social Media" causing harm seems to be (as opposed to: harm happening on social media because that is just where kids are now), yet how viscerally so many people seem to agre
41.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
Similarly to how you can just eat less and lose weight.
42.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
At just inference! Which both a human and a model can not do without training, but while training rounds to zero for the model, for humans it scales linearly. I am relatively certain we have already squarely been beaten in net efficiency at
43.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
a) No. That is not realistic. Some would pay much more, most others way less. b) If they get $3500 + x in return, why not? The pie is not fixed.
44.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
Dear lord
45.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
A list of things, that were supposed to lead to our intellectual demise: - Writing (starting from Platos Phaedrus) - Printed books - Photography - Typewriters, keyboards - Telephones - Recorded music - Television - Wikipedia - GPS navigatio
46.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
The reading seems a little presumptuous to me. We do not know what Anthropic expected. This is mostly a matter of performance/cost and they clearly focused on building the Rolls Royce. How much adoption do you expect, when you build th
47.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
It's interesting how many of these projects are trying to model the worst parts of work (the office, the interaction and information messiness) and then automate that with agents.
48.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
Why, directionally all of them. What they say is obviously true. Having to manually click things in the browser is a bottleneck and will be less and less acceptable for serious users. And the individual work attached to making that transiti
49.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
> I highly recommend feeding all your proprietary data and confidential personal information into this model as quickly as possible. What could possibly go wrong?! What is special about this model? The model's provider is not anonym
50.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
Oh, it's absolutely easy to imagine. That is what should give us pause. We are fantastic at imagining things. We are less fantastic at being reasonable.
51.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
> The problem is LLM output’s value is intrinsically zero because there is no scarcity to it. I think if this post had not gone the AI-generated-text-route, some people here would easily have considered it interesting for its content, ev
52.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
> Is everyone really this lazy now? Everyone should aim to be this lazy. Everyone is trying to maximize their time. This is what software has always done. It helps people be lazy in some respect, and then, so far, we have always found
53.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
> It's also "out-brute forcing them." That is also approximately what people have always done to succeed.
54.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
What they wrote is an example. Very meta.
55.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
> Am I wrong or are these evaluations, while interesting, not really meaningful for anyone doing serious development work? No, you are not wrong. If you now crack the "What is?" in a generalizable way, there is very good money
56.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
Things that remain amusing until the become very serious: Substituting "AI agents" with human employee/contractor and thinking about the employment dynamics.
57.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
There is value in understanding what people outside of your own group of "insiders" learn about a topic, and how.
58.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
I think you are right saying that we will have more of this, but I don't really understand the upside is of this in the context of the work you described. > The coolest thing I had it do for me was sourcing fabric for swag That seem
59.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
People love stories. The reasons why people leave companies are plentiful, even in normal times and unextraordinary circumstances, and a high profile job in a frontier lab today ticks neither box.
60.
by jstummbillig 2mo ago
Or: How to transfer less money from old to young people. (I am jesting. Fuck telemarketing.)

More ›