LurkandComment

Cost per token goes down yes. But are you using more tokens per task/ prompt/ project?

This is the mistake they made. Anthropic and OpenAI are great technically. I love them. But they are absolute crap at making most people feeling like its relevant to them or that AI companies care about them. So its' really easy to be dismissive of the tech and oppose things like data centers. I think the influencer route is a quick fix. They need to appeal to everyday problems but, understandably, the founders like Dario and Altman think very high level. They think they are doing what's best in a way, but not in a way that's relateable to most people. LLMs need to be more human friendly; example, solve little problems like actually writing without sounding like AI

The thinking people who would find this interesting and read this are probably more than capable of understanding this and critical enough to expect that. Conversation over the title is distraction of what's important. Just stick to keeping original source title and let people vote and down vote if they don't like it. That's what votes are for.

There is an essence to humanity in this type of work: "I'm doing this because I enjoy the way it makes me feel and nothing else". It's inspirational and I love looking at it. Keeping doing what you love, it also brings joy to others.

It could go either way. I think its better for Nvidia to play both open sides and closed models as their chips will be used in both. The only thing that compromises them is that there is a lot of investment they have in the closed models.

Time to see how Jensen plays it.

It should be more about how Public Services are underfunded and the process for applying and appeals for benefits is designed to be slow to account for this underfunding, but now something has bypassed one part of the design. It should be an argument as to why we need more funding for public services.

This is a very well trodden argument the poster is largely right about. But like others who have written about it like Nicholas Carr and Anil Dash, I agree with the concern, but it places a lot of agency on the technology and not the users decisions. On one hand, you can argue for a long time Google was the default page for the internet so you had no choice but to use it to search, on the other hand, people need to use their brains more when thinking critically. They need to learn how to use it to assist in thought. Yes, Google search results are ads, but scroll past the first few pages and dig. Also, refine searches and look at other sources by people you trust. Ultimately, this is a real concern, and I'm glad the author is updating thoughts on it.

I don't think there is a Sienfeld without The Stranger

1) This is going to be like Electric cars. You see how far ahead China is there for commercial viability for a wider consumer base

2) There are many reasons why Anthropic and Open Ai will collapse aside from this.

3) Wait until you have non-China models that are good enough. Hint: they already exist. Microsoft partnering with Mistral is a big red flag for OpenAI and Anthropic.

Next step, monitize every pixel, result and second into adveristing placement

If you're wondering what prevents or mitigates AI hallucinations on the AI layer from replicating or acting out on the physical layer look up QNX. They manage the deterministic reasonin gof robotics. You know them better as Blackberry.

If you're a global health benefits platform that relies on an AI model, do you think you're going to choose one that can get shutoff by a country due to something not remotely related to your business? If you're a buyer of that benefits platform, do you factor this into your purchasing now? X every industry.

That whole website is just beautiful. I'd love to see more work by the designer.

Every industry goes through its slop phase. You should see how much of early print was smut or really amaturish. We just like to talk about the Bible and the great art. What we need is a way to filter through it. AI should be decent at this, but for many intentional and unintentional reasons it isn't.

Just enough time to...

For claude shops this was a huge hit. But lets back this up. There are some companies that haven't even built a break-even model at this price because they are funded by investment. As soon as those investors lose patience the first dominos will fall. For those who have somewhat of a business model, will it survive a price increase? The bigger question is do the base model providers have enough runway and have a way to keep going as they need to recover costs.

This is market introductory pricing that hasn't factored in cost recovery. Most of it has been run on early investment with the assumption they will recover costs in the long run. The prices are subsidized across the board and they will need to go up signficantly to recover them.

1) This happened because they fundementally misunderstand how to use AI and how AI is priced 2) Most organizations are throwing everything in for analyses and not limiting the answer they want. You need to be specific of about what you analyze and what answers you want 3) People undervalue prompting or templated responses. I will have written. validated and sanity checked a prompt several times and run it across several models before I say its ready for use. But when it is, I know what it will give me and that the scope of its research and answer is as close to what I want as it can be. As little excess as I can. This all saves tokens

Variable costs - electricity etc. Current model is very resource intensive. You know when they build all those Olympic Venues and then once the Olympics is done the ongoing cost is too expensive and then they become derelict buildings.... like that...

AI is cheap right now. Let's re-ask this question when it's priced to recover profit and ROI.

Related: Alberta Voter Data was leaked to an American Company by the separatist movement. Also, the question right now is if there will be a referendum proposal.

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2026/05/20/investigations/a...

This is clear foriegn political interfierence. It's like mini-brexit. We have a weak, incompitent leader in Alberta who is giving in to her right-wing base so she can stay in power. It's David Cameron all over again.

See in an information war, it doesn't have to be true to be dangerous, and never assume how stock prices might effect people's resileance. The greater point is there are cans of worms that are opening that weren't anticipated. This is just one example;].

The Strait of Hormuz is a such a historical f-up. 1) It cuts the oil supply 2) It creates the demand and infrastructure for non-US backed Oil 3) It gives Iran a revenue stream and domain over taxing the Strait where none existed before 4) Crypto happens outstide of reach of most sanctions 5) Not knowing your footing: This has now encompassed the placement of underseas cables and global connectivity 5) As time goes one, there are other shoes that will drop 6) Even if this resolves, things like decoupling the USD and Oil now have momemntum.

PS I love AI, but it's whose hands AI is in that determines its use and benefits.

1. AI wipes out entery level jobs. Cost of tokens used will make you spend more especially overtime. Keep in mind, right now we're probably in the era of cheap tokens

2. We rehire base employees at lower wages. Move AI to hire level tasks. AI is now doing the work we said humans will do. Talent drains to other compaines. AI can do certain things every well but can't put it together. Start rehiring talent at lower wages

3. In the end, AI turns out to really be artificial wage competition designed to drive worke salaries down. All of this is subsidized by the government, fund managers and the environment. Billionaires leave earth in spaceship.

The current commercialization isn't economically sustainable.

I can't invest in Goolge products. I always feel like they're going to pull the plug or change the terms, pricing model etc.

In the comments.

Here's how its dehumanizing:

You say they're not good enough, they smell, they don't fit in, but you take their culture, their clothing, their food and rebrand it as scandinavian, high fashion, chic fitness, pumpkin spice. They do the things you value but for their skin color.

You pay them colored people wages, with colored people working conditions with no social mobility outside of where they live, but you literally rob them of voice.

Your lack of ability to see "why this is dehumanizing is" why you're replacing yourselves with A.I. "AI is better" f*k. AI is controlled by a few platform owners. Once everyone is replaced with AI they're jacking up the cost and no one of any color is eating. Just a few rich.

So yeah, i can understand why you think it isn't dehumanizing. You don't see when you do it to others, or when we do it to ourselves.

I'm just going to say this: Wouldn't load for me in Chrome, but the article loaded instantly in Edge... I never use Edge, I was just curious.