mrbungie

5 ms·

61.
by mrbungie 7mo ago
Can't wait to have LLM generated physical objects that explode on you face and no engineer can fix.
62.
by mrbungie 7mo ago
> Lab executives insist that serving tokens is profitable. Maybe marginally profitable, but right now they need to give out subsidies for people to use their products (Antigravity, Codex, Claude Code et al) in an actually useful manner t
63.
by mrbungie 7mo ago
> The premise is an interstellar mission, species level extinction risk, first contact, scientific problem solving. The film frames this through cute banter, soft sentiment, and quips that shrinks the movie scale. God forbid showing the
64.
by mrbungie 7mo ago
Afaik Anthropic still loses money for their main product in this space: Claude Code and their Max plans.
65.
by mrbungie 7mo ago
But then there is no safe way for them to "mortally wound" the software industry. The full argument is moot. I would add there are more reasons why this wouldn't work: costs due to OOM more usage, adoption/AI backlash, a
66.
by mrbungie 7mo ago
How would they mortally wound the software industry as of today? I find their software to be of subpar quality and resilience anyways.
67.
by mrbungie 7mo ago
I remember studies that showed that being mean with the LLM got better answers, but by the other hand I also remember an study showing that maximizing bug-related parameters ended up with meaner/malignant LLMs.
68.
by mrbungie 7mo ago
I can't really tell if this is sarcasm or not.
69.
by mrbungie 7mo ago
Fair enough, I should've said borderline decent.
70.
by mrbungie 7mo ago
The same way niche/luxury product and services compare to fast/cheap ones: they are made with focus and intent that goes against the statistical average, which also normally would take more time and effort to make. McDonalds cooks
71.
by mrbungie 8mo ago
(Not GP) There was a well recognized reproducibility problem in the ML field before LLM-mania, and that's considering published papers with proper peer-reviews. The current state of afairs in some ways is even less rigourous than that,
72.
by mrbungie 8mo ago
They don't have the know how (except by proxy via OpenAI) nor custom hardware and somehow they are even worse at integrating AI into their products than Google.
73.
by mrbungie 8mo ago
Was this "paper" eventually peer reviewed? PS: I know it is interesting and I don't doubt Antrophic, but for me it is so fascinating they get such a pass in science.
74.
by mrbungie 8mo ago
Opportunity costs: Would you rather pay 100 bucks for making more money or for your foss projects? The same can be said of your time, but here we're talking about scale benefits due to LLMs (i.e. lots of SaaSs dying due to lots of &quo
75.
by mrbungie 8mo ago
> full featured f/oss alternatives. Assuming this comes from lower barriers of entry to software engineering skills at scale with LLMs, this is still begs the question: Who will pay for the tokens? One thing is giving away your free
76.
by mrbungie 8mo ago
> What's Anthropic's optimization target??? Getting you the right answer as fast as possible! Are you totally sure they are not measuring/optimizing engagement metrics? Because at least I can bet OpenAI is doing that with
77.
by mrbungie 8mo ago
If you are really good and fast validating/fixing code output or you are actually not validating it more than just making sure it runs (no judging), I can see it paying out 95% of the time. But for what I've seen both validating m
78.
by mrbungie 8mo ago
Yet even Anthropic has shown the downsides to using them. I don't think it is a given that improvements in models scores and capabilities + being able to churn code as fast as we can will lead us to a singularity, we'll need more
79.
by mrbungie 8mo ago
My late grandma learnt how to use an iPad by herself during her 70s to 80s without any issues, mostly motivated by her wish to read her magazines, doomscroll facebook and play solitaire. Her last job was being a bakery cashier in her 30s an
80.
by mrbungie 8mo ago
Pretty edgy response. I'd say trying to scale in price rather than in quantity is a bad business strategy for tech period, specially if you hope to become Google-sized like OpenAI and company want.
81.
by mrbungie 9mo ago
Why would you need a GPU for an AI managed instance? I guess it would useful for some workloads, but arguably not for most really.
82.
by mrbungie 9mo ago
Well, this is a good example of "Shareholder value != customer value".
83.
by mrbungie 9mo ago
Great, can't wait to balance the ultra-pro-AI views I get everyday from mainstream media, X, Hacker News, Reddit, etc.
84.
by mrbungie 9mo ago
They took the stupidest metric ever and made a moronic target out of it.
85.
by mrbungie 9mo ago
> Anyone who still keeps implying these are statistical parrots or whatever is just going to regret these decisions in the future. You know this is a false dichotomy right? You can treat and consider LLMs statistical parrots and at the s
86.
by mrbungie 10mo ago
Well OpenCode already exists and you can connect it to multiple providers, so you could just say that the agentic CLI harness business model as a service/billable feature is no more. In hindsight I would say it never made sense in the
87.
by mrbungie 10mo ago
Antigravity also gives access to Opus 4.5, and OpenCode lets use Antigravity APIs too.
88.
by mrbungie 10mo ago
Sam wants so bad for OpenAI to be a proper big tech company, probably one that's more culturally similar to Apple-y than Google/MSFT-y so I guess they are cargo-culting some parts of Apple. That website reminds me of a very low qu
89.
by mrbungie 10mo ago
You should steel-man the argument. GP is talking about qualia, obviously for the sake of the argument you assume the comparison is between two people with similar eyes.
90.
by mrbungie 10mo ago
Why is that relevant if there is no one willing to prosecute and convict?

More ›