weakfish

I would highly recommend the book "Four Thousand Weeks" by Oliver Burkeman. The main theme of it is that many of our anxieties stem from inability to accept our inherent limitations as humans, and that trying to come up with the perfect productivity system / planning / etc. are all coping mechanisms for that angst that only fuel it over time.

As someone who has struggled greatly with these issues, it was an enlightening read.

To loosely quote the book, shifting your perspective doesn't erase the anxiety, but makes it not quite so unbearable.

If you right click on the page, you can 'open image in new tab' and get an image of the current screen. I assume that means it is rendering an entirely new image each frame... which is a tad wild.

You’re assuming that progress will continue at the same rate (it’s plateaud a bit as far as I can tell, I can look for sources tomorrow but am on phone now :))

& I think it’s fairly demonstrated that the industry isn’t profitable for training ever increasingly huge models, which get exponentially more expensive each iteration

As a certified Gen Z member: respectfully, what the fuck are you on about?

The mythical Gen Z you are describing is the hyperbolic exaggeration that is equivalent to me describing all boomers as racist, all Gen X as entitled, all millennials as lazy, etc.

Poe’s law displayed beautifully here

IMO English as a programming language is a fools errand. Part of the reason why we _have_ programming languages is because it turns out human language is too ambiguous.

This is gonna kill someone.

My sister went to a furry convention this last weekend. I don't get it, but yeah, I am just kind of like "cool! I hope it was fun!"

My philosophy in most things. Even if I don’t understand it, who cares? It’s America and that means freedom

I’d prefer kindness and good faith when talking to strangers, but maybe my expectations are too high.

Do you think you’ll change someone’s mind by being an asshole? Rarely works.

> turd bucket autist

I’d be more willing to engage with your argument in good faith without inflammatory language like this. Try and meet people where they are and these conversations become easier.

I feel the same way. Maybe it’s the ADHD, maybe I’m just dumb, but I cannot parse well the giant walls they tend to produce.

That doesn’t mean evidence for banal claims isn’t required.

Yes. What does undeniably trans mean? Can you explain what makes you so confident? How is this provable?

How? Please explain.

What does that have to do with anything?

Btw you’re replying to different people

As I said in my original comment, I don’t have an answer. I refuse to believe though that the only options that exist are the ones already tried. Do you really think in the couple thousand years of history, we’ve exhausted every viable option when liberal democracy is only an incredibly recent invention?

The question that many do not want to think about. We (as a society (referring to all Western Liberalism, not just the US)) are so thoroughly convinced that Liberal Democracy is the End of History, and it's the 'flawed but best,' as many say, but refuse to imagine something better.

It's puzzling that a system that is supposed to reward creativity and genius like capitalism limits it's inhabitants in their imagination when it comes to how one might structure society.

I don't claim to have the answer, and _no,_ my issues with Liberal Democracy/Capitalism don't mean I'm a communist / socialist / thing-people-don't-like.

What's your proof? Or are you just going to make snide one-liners to feel like you won?

> “they all want”

Let me stop you right there - any time you generalize to that degree, you’ve already failed to think critically and charitably about the issue.

You’re missing their point, they’re not defending EU policy and in fact agree that current capability is poor. They’re saying that it can change and that the US is also self sabotaging in other ways.

dude, I don't want to be a hater, but this is a pretty crappy game that barely works. I honest to god could have made this in a week without AI. Is it cool that AI made it in 2 days? Sure, but it's not groundbreaking.

Also, I don't think we're at an inflection point when companies are starting to wisen up to just how much this shit costs.

Good input, and thanks for sharing & writing the article!

Yeah, I’ll second that. I see folks moving _fast_, but boy oh boy are they breaking things (or delivering something that never worked) which if anything makes _me_ slower lol

> But! Hold my beer… in February 2026 METR effectively walked it back : their follow-up estimates flipped to a speedup (with error bars wide enough to ride a Moto Guzzi, with panniers, through!), and they abandoned the study design entirely - because developers now refuse to work without AI, and can’t reliably self-report time on agentic work. Their latest position: AI probably speeds developers up in 2026, and we can no longer cleanly measure by how much.

This may be true, but they followed in May with this [0]:

> Importantly, survey results are not necessarily grounded in reality. There are reasons to be skeptical of people’s responses to counterfactual questions such as about AI’s effect on productivity — for instance, our study in early 2025 found that people overestimated AI’s effect on their time spent on tasks by 40 percentage points on average.

[0] https://metr.org/blog/2026-05-11-ai-usage-survey/#productivi...

> you could delay adopting “the cloud” for a couple of years and survive. With AI you might get a few months.

I really dislike these claims that act like they know the future of engineering, that they’ve been let in on some enlightenment that we haven’t been. What’s going to happen in a few months? Is Sam Altman going to nuke my house from orbit? Or is it because my CTO is going to fire me for not using AI? If it’s the latter, that’s not a curiosity problem, that’s a “there’s a gun to my head” problem.

Because it's generating that output using a simulacra, which may mislead and act as if it is Socrates, not using real human reasoning to extrapolate.

There isn't an objective right or wrong here, but it just strikes me as gross. It's fine if you disagree and I appreciate you interrogating the reasons as it helps us both strengthen our thinking.

Because this is placing words in their mouth and pretending it’s something they’d say, not just analyzing it. It pretends in knows their inner world and mind when we only have public artifacts.

Historians also generally adhere to a standard when making a claim, not throwing it to the math machine for regurgitating.

Wording aside, I think the concept is icky.