pohl

It’s a common metaphor for merging a branch to the trunk. Probably because multiple in-flight development branches create a sort of air traffic control problem.

It starts lean, yeah. Did you know you can prompt it to add the capability you feel you’re missing?

Yesterday we learned that it’s been shipping with Claude Code since mid June, so it has a lot of active users already.

Also, the unsafe footprint seems reasonable — the bulk of it in FFI wrappers.

Not sure where you’re from but it’s not esoteric at all. Here in the US our current administration is constantly vice-signaling to white supremacists to maintain them as a political base, and uses myriad similar winks to do it. One example: in 2020 the Trump campaign ran Facebook ads featuring an inverted red triangle. The opening sentence was 14 words long. They ran the ad 88 times. It’s ok to choose to be ignorant of the implications, but it’s better to maintain situational awareness.

(I’m not saying the game needs to change its name.)

Absolutely, it’s an act of kindness to loop them in. And if an eavesdropper complains about it I’d be super suspicious.

Same, but I blame Musk for that. Never seen someone squander so much good will so quickly. It was a choice he made but could have easily avoided, and it’s not like he couldn’t anticipate the downstream effects.

This is a frequently mentioned criticism. Is there a good argument about why that approach could have been done in the same amount of time? Seems like larger scope and more uncertainty to me.

What specific critical thought(s) do you wish were voiced?

deep cut

Is it useful to limit these thoughts to a dictator doing dictator stuff, though? What would be the material difference be between that and operatives of his political party astroturfing local school boards to remove books that teach about the racial history of the country or the existance of trans folk, to make it appear as though the local community decided to do it?

But will it help those baristas pay off the student loans that paid for their philosophy degrees?

None of that supports the claim that it "isn't controllable," though. A curious mind should probably find it interesting that it can be fallible in those ways yet still be useful for producing work, and ask how both can be true at the same time.

> because the outcome you get from AI isn't controllable. You can give it the best prompts and design suggestions and it'll still give you completely wrong or horribly written code.

I don’t have a dog in this fight but it seems you’re not accounting for iteration and feedback. A horse will veer off of a road if not occasionally nudged to stay on it, but is useful transportation, nevertheless.

It’s a tragedy. I feel the work they were doing was important. At least we got this talk from guy steele

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lw6TaiXzHAE

If anything, LLMs make it easier to choose from a broad set of options. The tradeoffs are the same as pre-LLM days, but the learning curve is more favorable.

I was also tempted to offer GEB as a better example, although I’ve read it twice. Many bounce off of it.

I bought one a couple months ago. It feels strange to have a computer appreciate in value.

The government would need to sell their position in order to have gains.

Counterpoint: modern fighters need higher-performance engines not just for thrust but also to run and cool more and more electronics. Arguably both are underpowered from where they need to be.

We already know that he doesn’t read the PDB, and that they even tried sprinkling his own name throughout the text to hold his interest.

This should be an open standard like AGENTS.md or skills. What do other harnesses do?

It wouldn’t matter if they had. He’s doesn’t listen to anything he doesn’t want to hear. At this point one can safely assume that he was told exactly how this strategic defeat would play out, and it went in one ear and out the other.

I knew before clicking it was the 80 column card.

Part of that traditional naval success has come from having presidents not stepping on their own dicks.

Been wanting to play this. Alas, macOS support is table stakes for me.

What a great way to defang them long term.

It’s easy to imagine an organization with a paranoid security posture ending up with that configuration because they decided to only enable a minimum necessary feature set where they determined that JS was necessary while WASM was not.

I wonder why he didn't argue against the point by using an actual billionaire to illustrate. Instead he chose someone who is not a billionaire, and imagined them becoming one with nine and a half months of constant 93% growth. Couldn't his counterargument become stronger without the underpants gnome logic?

There’s no reason to invent your own head canon, the influence was openly acknowledged when Swift was new and it continues now that the language is developed out in the open (see Swift Ownership Manifesto)

My salary adjustment didn’t doesn’t keep up with inflation, but his ability to monetize his position in public office far outstrips it. Why would he care? He can point a firehose of public money straight into his own pocket with no consequences.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=n7gphyYNsdM