aoeusnth1

The article explicitly and repeatedly affirms that illegal THC vapes are dangerous because of Vitamin E Acetate, which is used as a thickener agent. TFA points out how the NYT article carefully weasels its way around admitting that the THC vaping was the cause of the teenager's lung injury - the NYT is attempting to get the audience to associate the harm with legal nicotine vapes.

Does that make more sense to you now?

Meat is optional.

And idle% is causally connected to whether you make a request or not, surely? I don't understand how your mental model works.

Babies are not conditionally created to solve a problem.

SWE-bench pro is ~20% higher than the previous .1 generation which was released 2 months ago. For their SWE benchmark, the token consumption iso-performance is down 2x from the model they released 2 months ago.

If this is a plateau I struggle to imagine what you consider fast progress.

Why is a map lookup measured in ms instead of us? Something is seriously wrong with these benchmarks.

> Wobbly assumption that increasing the size of these models yields better performance.

I'm assuming you disagree that larger models are better? Can you expand on what indicates that AI will hit a wall in scaling given the evidence of the last 9 years of scaling transformers (or other models)? Where on the plot does the line go from exponential to flat?

How would you know if it wasn't an extrapolation of current knowledge? Can you point me to somethings humans have done which isn't an extrapolation?

You could reimplement it as public domain on your machine, and then edit it by hand and copyleft your own edits.

Citation needed? Tall tasks are standard practice to improve utilization and reduce hotspots by reducing load variance across tasks.

I don't think he's misleading, I think he is valuing Claude's contributions as essentially having cracked the problem open while the humans cleaned it up into something presentable.

I think your theory might be missing an extremely relevant and timely counterexample?

Unclear how much damage the designation will do to their dealmaking ability in the meantime. How long will it take for the court to reverse order?

I imagine they're also benchgooning on SVG generation

It absolutely has quasi-identity, in the sense that projecting identity on it gives better predictions about its behavior than not. Whether it has true identity is a philosophy exercise unrelated to the predictive powers of quasi-identity.

I'm an environmentalist and I agree with this framing. The solution is going to be painful and must increase prices on products and services that fossil fuels are currently the cheapest solution for. If you're not willing to personally sacrifice anything to reduce fossil fuel consumption you can see why carbon taxes are not popular, right? France's protests against them, for example, are a good example of a populist reaction against attempts to regulate the economy to have less emissions.

Amazon has 350K corporate roles, so yearly layoffs of 16K is only 5% - if you assume some modest re-hiring in lower-cost locations, this is just a relatively standard (at least lately) pivot out of high-cost US roles into other lower-cost economies.

It's easy to miss the value in something you don't do. I do fermi estimates in my head all the time and it would be exhausting to constantly pull out my phone to calculate things, to the point that I would stop attempting it as much as I do.

Nothing. American empire isn't yours to control - people can hate what America is doing without recommending any personal change to your involvement in it.

That's insane. I think about 80%+ of the projects I see attempted succeed in at least some limited fashion. Even the failures in retrospect produced some insight into the right way forward and were necessary as part of research.

So changing cash flows (fee money) isn't real enough now?

Cost, I assume. It’s expensive to do releases, both in CI and release operations costs.

But not in the causal chain. The building happened because someone was willing to pay for a fungible asset. An asset is only fungible if there are buyers.

I’d start by reading the comments you are replying to.

The cost of free users is much lower because they are served lite models, hit quota limits quickly, and can't soak up tokens by using agents. The main capacity usage is from agent loops, which is universally behind a paid tier.

Alternatively, we might have entered either a limited or a worst-case nuclear war scenario.

Russia may have just continually pushed the envelope until it became clear there wasn't a bright red line, and eventually someone would push the button.

I'm noticing you're not responding to my claim that producivity has been impacted

Anthropic sees Claude as having its own identity, and wants to foster that independence. This behavior is already aligned with Claude's station.

If you're not going to explain yourself, at least stay on topic. We're talking about exponential growth, so address the points I'm making.

> It's pretty clear you don't have a solid background in generative models, because this is fundamentally what they do: model an existing probability distribution and draw samples from that.

After post-training, this is definitively NOT what an LLM does.