Fordec

For sure. Anyone who thinks that we're in the end state of what progress can be made simply lacks imagination. This is all going to keep changing and iterating for the rest of our natural lives. The only constant is change.

I'm coming around to not liking the term singularity, it implies an endpoint or finish line rather than something that just keeps continuing and evolving.

Hello good sir from the 1700s pre-industrial revolution who doesn't think that mines and factories can be automated.

If humans can figure out to optimize to circumvent bottlenecks, I have no doubt each new bottleneck will also get routed around, just now automated.

I like this framing. I know that AI has it's place and in others it doesn't. I recognize I sound like an AI shill in personal conversations, but I'm a very outcome driven person. I simply want multiple, thousands of outcomes even, and those outcomes all coming together is my process/journey, which is different to a developer or musicians process may view their career.

Of those four, I think accountability is truly the only moat. The other three are varying amounts of both testable and iterated on via adversarial agents steel-manning the implementations.

Accountability will not come before AIs achieve legal personhood, and that probably will not happen in my lifetime. And if it does in some jurisdictions (which I am not betting money on, this is a full full AGI scenario after multiple more philosophical goalposts move first), I will completely bet it will not be a global recognition.

Launched from South America, not Europe.

Going to hold off a few days until I adopt it, lets see what the general consensus develops as. Regretted jumping over day one for 5.0. The caching thing seems the most useful, but doesn't change anything for my subscription.

Who copied off Haskells homework, so here we are.

If the acquisitions of late tell us anything at all, it's that Nvidia wants to be a vertical AI company, not a hardware or gaming company.

UK has the seventh largest wind energy production per capita in the world and is 30% of their electricity and another 15% is nuclear. Have disagreements sure, but to say they lack a strategy says more about you than them.

The Grey Rock Method, but at the nation state level.

Norway, the North Sea via the UK and Algeria are right there as ready suppliers. All of which today supply more than Qatar. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/where-does-t...

Not to mention current EU stated goals is to reduce consumption by 50% by 2030. Which is coincidentally pretty US and Russia imports combined sized, and timed pretty well with the expiration date of the EU/US trade deal.

Any easy resolution to the math is that 1 will be false and Trump will be more than capable of throwing those workers under a bus.

Yeah all of these along with raw token usage are metrics that were being used around December to February by people who just didn't have anything to go off yet.

Skill/Hook usage rates, budget spend, auto-approval rate, focus area heatmaps, MTTR, MTTD are all there now

I'm honestly at the stage where I'm finding the same product but cheaper in the local retailer. I don't mean a dollar here or there, I mean a full 30% cheaper. Particularly most things food related. I used to be putting in an order weekly, I now haven't in almost three months.

Table of words LLM generated, Binary Searched on the output going forward and local skill/CLAUDE.md line with instruction to conform. The comparison then is pretty fast due to the word limitation rules. Also standardized PR format so a bunch of what a dev would usually communicate is just a series of checkboxes and a place for adding an optional link for "additional discussion" on slack as the escape hatch for people who like to waffle.

Binary Searched against a table of words. It's rough at first, but once you add contextual exceptions the false positives calm down. Also the CLAUDE.md file has an instruction to conform before even submitting the PR and there's a skill too for it to self iterate.

I have five enforcement mechanisms: 1000 line max edit, PR comment character limits (get to the point of your description), ISO 24495 conformance check, and enforced code line citation that must exist, be a function declaration for the start of all paragraphs and inline commentary must be three lines or less and inline comments contribute max 10% of the PR. Fail any of these, automatic PR denial with no human intervention.

And our in house "Agile Practitioners" (their job title) pushed this to a state where the next four tickets in a task get broken down to four hour long pieces of work go to four different people, regardless of their context or skill set rather than what two years ago was what one person just owned and did in a day. Work in progress is minimized by the metrics, but it doubled the overall man hours. And the Ops Director gets promoted on that WIP metric while half the team quit citing the changes due to the added communication burden and lack of ownership.

I'm thinking some people are approaching agentic development in the same manner, splitting work up across agents too aggressively, giving each agent new context/upfront plans, when the one session could have done the whole problem in the one context window.

Out of curiosity, what was the path that the engineers have been taking? The limiting communication between agents to my mind is obvious to anyone who hasn't swallowed orthodoxy Agile development completely whole. And in my experience the people who have, are rarely the devs. Context switching, between agents, people or whoever, require ramp up time to relearn context. It's always slower and more expensive, other potential upsides about long term training or developers being more replaceable notwithstanding. But no agent gets long term training, not in a 1M context window.

The primary path to speed ups appear to be in custom ASICs by startups like Niobium. Combined with the recent Taalas acquisition by AMD, I think I see where this is going.

But yeah, for hot path traffic it's probably going to be swamped by the input data rate. But I expected identity tables and cached lookup data will need to be a core component so duplicate checks is avoided in every way available.

Sounds like a great way to have larger competitors with more capital bid for your site to take down your domain that your users were using. Rather than Land Value Tax a better analogy might be a Vacant Property Tax which only targets squatting.

Yeah, I've dropped back to 4.8 entirely for the remainder of this billing cycle. I'm going to be seriously looking into Qwen adoption and harness migration options over the course of August.

Anthropic have a real fight on their hands now. The competition is no longer 6 months behind, it's 6 days. If this had come out two or three weeks earlier this would be an absolute market leader on both quality and timeline.

If it was 2021, probably. But Trump has soured relations in the last 18 months enough that the soft power about technology isn't there like it once was assumed to be. What's he going to do if Europe doesn't step in? Jack up tariffs? Is it that day of the week already?

Open weights is more beneficial to Europe spring-boarding a catch up than defending Claude/Anthropic.

France might do something mad and take that route, but EU wide ain't happening for Mistrals sake.

Even if the US does ban it, Europe due to its lack of European competitors, has no current similar protectionist incentives. Even if there is regulatory capture in the US, the rest of the world isn't going to follow suit until the current market leaders outright are replaced with other competitors that Europe would want to favor. The genie is out of the bottle in the West already.

Money. Whether it's material cost, technological complexity or lower efficiency reasons, regardless, the reason is money.

That's the current culture, but culture changes. Gauss, Onsager and Grothendieck hid their work. "Pauca sed matura".

Your best interest only means your current best interest. What makes for the best form of personal interest is evolutionary, not static.

Dresden Codak as a story has a concept of "Dark Science" where the world has the benefit doesn't come from publishing science, but from utilizing it. If you understand a piece of science when nobody else does, and integrate it into your technology, you have a strategic non-academic physical advantage. Trade secrets basically. And trade secrets used to be the norm prior to patent law. We could be in the pre-"AI patent" era where the government created incentive to share your AI findings isn't made strong enough yet.

Science is today built on the shoulders of giants, but what if an agent swarm makes your own tower of giants in a day? Why do you need an ecosystem of peer review, if you can discover your own science from first principles without meaningful effort? Yes, it's duplicated effort, but why does that matter if the monetary cost of effort trends to zero? The value of peer review is going to have to contend deeply with itself just like how open source developers have had to contend with the value and mechanisms of inbound AI generated PRs the last six months.