1,330 karma · joined March 1, 2025
GPT-5 = Overengineering/complexity/"enterprise" king
Claude = "Get straightforwaed shit done efficiently" king
Furthermore they've violated plenty of consumer protection laws in countries where those are strong, so the entire premise doesn't hold up.
On the supermajority bit, in more and more countries there's already a supermajority for banning phones from schools, more and more for banning it for children altogether, and so on. I think that's a clear sign people would actually be in favour of quite a lot of measures to tone things down, like the one I mentioned. Total bans I wouldn't vouch for.
It's bad at agentic stuff, especially coding. Incomparably so compared to Claude and now GPT-5. But if it's just about asking it random stuff, and especially going on for very long in the same conversation - which non-tech users have a tendency to do - Gemini wins. It's still the best at long context, noticing things said long ago.
Earlier this week I was doing some debugging. For debugging especially I like to run sonnet/gpt5/2.5-pro in parallel with the same prompt/convo. Gemini was the only one that, 4 or so messages in, pointed out something very relevant in the middle of the logs in the very first message. GPT and Sonnet both failed to notice, leading them to give wrong sample code. I would've wasted more time if I hadn't used Gemini.
It's also still the best at a good number of low-resource languages. It doesn't glaze too much (Sonnet, ChatGPT) without being overly stubborn (raw GPT-5 API). It's by far the best at OCR and image recognition, which a lot of average users use quite a bit.
Google's ridiculously bad at marketing and AI UX, but they'll get there. They're already much more than just a "bang for the buck" player.
FWIW I use all 3 above mentioned on a daily basis for a wide variety of tasks, often side-by-side in parallel to compare performance.
Have you noticed how things are going? Do you genuinely believe these are non-factors?
It's pretty obvious and not a real point of contention. Being honest about this does not support the raid, and acting as if it does helps nobody and only hurts.
[0] https://www.teamblind.com/kr/post/%ED%98%84%EC%B0%A8-%EC%97%...
To what % are you confident thst you would be one of the first participants in these, were the same to happen to your own country?
What you're advocating benefits the greater evil ten times as much over a 20-year timespan. They're absolutely loving you. The more Bidens, the more Harrises, the more Clintons, the better for them.
You know why China is doing so well? Because they still remember how to think in the long term.
From an HNer I'd also expect the understanding that yes, old accounts does give less protections, trivially from an information theory perspective.
In other words, it's very believable. It is incredible how billions of hours have been spent on Vergangenheitsbewältigung, and nothing has been learnt. Potentially the best phenomenon in existence at showing that humanity is, after all, so much less intelligent than it believes it is - that even after such a destructive event and so much performative effort at analysis and learning, the key takeaway did not become part of the social psyche whatsoever.
Much of Asia.
> How do they avoid the failure modes described in this article?
My suggestion was that this is exactly what a meaningful article on this topic would mention, as clearly the failure modes aren't universal. I'm not the one writing articles about it.
> Is it possible they are simply behind the curve?
Au contraire, ghost kitchens were already more of a thing here before COVID.
For what it's worth, I've really never seen pure international students really been included in that term, especially those that are the student equivalent of expats on a fixed-term contract - another group I've never seen included. In all discussions I've been part of, it' s about people with heritage from country A (whether born there or through family), but "settled" (or if a minor, being raised) in country B, with the above two groups not fitting into the "settled" part, planning to move back to A the second their contract(/term) ends. But I'm sure there's other valid definitions out there and it depends on the context and all.
This has been clear for very long. Hence why they're still not doing it, and have for the last 9 years been and still[1] continue to push for Clinton-like candidates rather than whatever candidate has the biggest chance of winning elections. It isn't incompetence, and it hasn't been for ages. They're nearly just as captured. It's true that they're slightly less captured than R overall, but not to an extent that is actually meaningful.
Stating it as an "if" is copium. They have failed to, are failing to, and will continue to fail to do this, and it's intentional. What you're saying is so blindingly obvious that there is no other explanation - no Hanlon's razor for this one, the incompetence angle is not realistic.
[1] https://edition.cnn.com/2025/07/17/politics/2028-presidentia...
The first thing you need to come to terms with is that losing in 2020 would've been better for the long-term. Once you've gained that freedom, realizing that simply winning an election can be the worse option, you can start thinking about what would instead be better.
Heh. But seriously, all frontier models do it, it's in the top 3 of tells that even someone with zero LLM experience can spot.