vcryan

People's volume and approach varies. I'm a happy customer and I use my entire double max subscription on planning and analysis and have other models doing all my implementation work because I would burn through my subscription in a day or less. It's difficult to calculate, but I'm something like 10-20 billion token per week consumer and I can't use a US-based model to do this volume of implementation work.

Also, a lot of this work is verification to ensure that AI generated code does what is intended and is safe to merge and deploy. That verification work is critical and uses a lot of tokens.

Well articulated. Ty

Well, I don't go to website anymore... so ha! ;)

It can be both. They were already doing it and the situation made it more urgent.

Sounds very democratic...

Houthis are very resourceful

Oh yes! I forgot about that. Yes, you can see this in benchmarks about hy3 preview and hy3 release still today because they measured them separately - it was significant.

I used Hy3 quite a bit for the type of tasks it was suited for. Excited about this. My one concern over Hy3 was speed. In theory, it could be served much faster as a smaller model but it was relatively slow everywhere I could get it (including from Tencent directly) but also several other inference providers.

Definitely curious to get the perspective on this topic from some of Jeffrey Epstein's other friends as well.

Yes, 37Signals DHH have an amazing gift for taking something that is old and not interesting and getting a lot of attention for making it seem new and innovative. That is a gift!

Look - I'm am the opposite of DHH fan -- that said -- they could fix all these bugs/security issues that same way they created them. It makes sense to some extent to create a product that emphasized what is different about it from a feature/UX perspective so people can consider if it would even be useful to them at all. If they can prove that they have created something useful - then they can fix all these issues. Fixing these issues is not hard. Creating a useful product that people want -- this is the hard part.

I hate to day this, but most coding work isn't hard at all - for a human or AI. There are a lot of important skills around coding, but for most people, much of the time, they are not doing any coding that is particularly challenging, difficult, it novel.

If you have a truly hard problem - sure write some code or take a hybrid approach. Still, let's not pretend this is what most people are tasked with.

Or a one state solution with a Palestinian leader.

Yes, but when your trying to cover up a genocide it's a bit different

I wouldn't say everywhere. Who else is trying to cover up genocide, ethic cleansing, and apartheid?

Definitely not relevant. But is it even news? I'm sure some of them farted - who cares?

The feeling of "leadership" is probably a hallucination unless your actions are being followed by other humans.

Generally speaking, leadership is quite unlike issueing others that others follow unquestionably.

Let's see what it is. They said "significantly" not "tremendously". Doubling the price would be significant, still, it would be very affordable. Let's see!

Meta never wants to be left out.

It seems like one day, Google or Meta might produce a coding model worth discussing. That day is not today.

It really depends on how you define "complete". It's possible the answer in "not large at all" if we're looking for high-quality, reliable, user-friendly software that works near perfectly after being written, tested, deployed completely by AI with no human intervention.

People who try to get AI to do a lot of un-manned work seem to have a bit of a bias toward viewing LLM work as "good" or "good enough" in a way that they wouldn't have accepted in the pre-AI era.

Agree. Harness can not be a moat. There are many open harnesses and they are at least on par with the providers ones. It looks like Anthropic/OpenAI's approach to vendor lock-in is not so much the inference or the harness it is functional integration across the individuals and teams in a company. I don't think this will be a moat either, but I think it's all they have outside of compute.

People tend to overlook the main benefit of Tailwind: components and pages become self-contained. As such, changing them doesn't cause unintended side-effects to other pages and all or parts of a component can be dropped into another page and it "just works." This is a huge benefit as the normative/intended behavior of CSS makes changes risky on large sites. Now, there are other ways to do this, but Tailwind is quite effective at it.

These risks are significantly overstated.

I generate a lot of code, a lot of PRs, a lot of issues and git/Github are fine for me. As a software engineer, I face many challenging issues but git is not one of them.

Well, except for the part where the religion forbids it.

I guess they have to make some statement about this, but we don't have to care. This is like the zoo making a statement about the employment of clowns. Clowns a a circus thing, nobody asked the zoo's opinion.

Did you ask them if they wanted to talk to each other? I'd like to see the user research in this.

Yes, the way you are gathering data is very inaccurate. For example, a certain county has bombed several churches in the past few years - and that appears not to register at all.

They had a good run!