itemize123

im sorry u feel this way

but, importantly, it is not the main reason why people are skeptical of bun rewrite right

it's just inaccurate data prior to microsft acq

the underlying cause of addiction is very different. But if there is enough evidence that they're similarly damaging (in magnitude), I think that fundamental difference is irrelevant.

how is it mutually exclusive

exactly, I found that it's eerily similar to those marketing copies. gets obnoxious

when you make assertions that can be checked, check them please. doubly check it when it's contrarian.

question's phrasing made your judgement obvious

what is lacking is a benchmark. I think the OP is trying to elicit that.

completely agree. while I share dario's concerns, his letter is very intellectually dishonest.

quite simply because models become better?

I think it's possible; But in the same vein, amongst other things, regulation is a transparent trojan horse to stop open-weight models - they would, on the next phase, argue that guardrails can be fine-tuned away if weights are open etc;

i think they could - there is an equivalence of trade dumping and trade protectionism here.

just protectionism argument would suffice no?

once you read the book, and learn from it and use the knowledge in your livelihood - you have to perpetually pay the author? Doesn't sound right.

or, hear me out, advertisers can do real-time advertising based on hyper-now context

obviously, a universal model doesn't exist since the signals are non-stationary but it's way better than what tarot reading

what do you mean by this is solved?

thinking aloud here - so it seems like 2 things are taken as intuitive here:

a) energy is conserved in any frame of reference. b) energy can vary in 2 frame of references.

but then what it feels like is that when you reference the energy as mE(v), the v is actually not the only variable, and it will be more like mE(v, v_moving_reference)?

so we also must take intuitive that c) E(v, v_moving_reference) == E(v - v_moving_reference)

it's not regulatory capture, because they are not regulating what customers can use - it's limiting what some companies can serve. it's way less impactful to the market as a whole.

literally the opposite of regulatory capture - it spells trouble for specifically openai and anthropic mostly

what's the future market for that? won't Micron in particular have to be a counterparty to that anyway to ensure delivery - why would they want that??

I would categorize the op as "technically false" but if they don't voluntarily delay, they would be export controlled.

easy - lobbying

it's not just media. or rather media is reporting based on fund interests.

sounds even more plausible under that scenario?

tinfoil doesn't seem to distinguish between cached and input tokens. I think that would make it untenably expensive

u seem to be the only one who used it here - how did it compare to opus and gpt5.5? in theory it should be at least on par if not better at times right.

u get a pool of them + sakana?

it's just one of their products right