You need to actually use it and understand what it does before you clown on.

Try vibe coding a hello world project with the Opus models and Claude code. It’s not perfect by any stretch, but to argue it has no use case is absurd.

I mean, no software developer is going to go back to completely not using LLMs after Claude Code.

They’ve literally been caught using distillation training off the American models. They undoubtedly do. Even the more efficient American models do.

Big baby bitch can’t even think things through.

No they’re not.

The best Chinese models are good, but they’re resoundingly outclassed by the likes of Claude.

And that’s not to mention the Chinese models are trained off the American models, i.e. they can’t exist without the American ones being developed first.

Lmfao, look at this righteous edge lord.

Who needs to think things through, when you can just condemn someone who says anything “black” when you’re on team “white”.

Talking total debt is somewhat meaningless.

The important number is the ratio between their loss and their revenue.

i.e. the convenience store down the street could operate at a loss before turning profitable, and accumulate far less than half the debt of iHeartRadio, but that doesn’t mean the convenience store is the better long term investment. When it turns a profit, it’s potential profit is far smaller than iHeartRadio’s was.

I have no love for AI but I feel like the people clowning on this don’t understand the most basic aspects of how businesses work.

It is very common to take losses early on and return a profit later.

I don’t necessarily disagree.

Though it does raise concerns about government identity systems and fascist governments…

I grew up thinking that was a ridiculous anachronism, but looking at how far the US has fallen, I do understand the concern.

Imho the best option is just OS level enforcement. You buy a device, you set up accounts on them, some can be kid accounts, those ones have their web fetches always include their restrictions.

This is horseshit.

It is worth remembering that many of those who champion Digital Sovereignty today were silent back in 2006, when the open ISO/IEC ODF standard — the pillar of Digital Sovereignty — was announced: not only did they not listen to us during all these years, but in some cases they greeted us with a condescending smile.

If we can speak of Digital Sovereignty in Europe today, it is thanks to The Document Foundation and LibreOffice community members at large, who kept the flag of open-source office suites flying when everyone was predicting their demise, and who continued to develop the only truly open and standard format that guarantees Digital Sovereignty, as it provides full user control over content.

The answer to this, is “thank you for your service”. It is / was genuinely valuable. That being said, arguments about what people said or agreed with in the past is irrelevant to discussions about how to move forward.

The basic premise of this kind of arguing is a smell that you don’t actually have a real argument to lean on. It’s like credential dropping, it’s a heuristic that hints at what could be a likelier truth than another, based purely on debate metadata, but that’s it, and by their nature / definition, heuristics are constantly wrong.

Insisting on a white knight campaign to make a file format standard when you are not the standard file saving platform is Quixotic. It does not make you an ally of Microsoft to meet users where they’re at.

The EU government mandating a certain file format might actually move the needle, a niche documenting software’s defaults will not. This is why Microsoft’s famous playbook was “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish”, not “try and force a niche number of users into making this a thing somehow” (of course, Microsoft has also tried and failed the latter playbook numerous times).

Social media needs regulation for everyone, and I’m deeply concerned about the impact of ID verification on the open web, but at the same time, given the clear harms, it’s hard to argue with people attempting some form of regulation, even if limited and imperfect.

No, as someone who has grown up and seen the change, it is vastly different.

I mean sort of, but it’s a parenting issue in the way that smoking was for our grandparents, but in some ways, much worse.

With smoking back in the day, our grandparents were addicted to it, and inadvertently modelled that behaviour for our parents (or for other people’s kids who thought they looked cool), leading way more of our parents generation to smoke, even though they started growing up being aware of the risks and the impact it was having on their parents.

Social media is operating like that, but one difference is that smoking mostly cost people money… It did also cost them time, but most of that time was paid in years of their lives at the end. Social media is costing everyone their time constantly, day in - day out, and sapping their attention, focus, and willpower… Leaving social media addicted parents even less bandwidth to try and make sure their kids grow up different then smoking parents.

I was basing my assessment on the content of the article.

We’re a small company so I do the opposite and am avoiding any co-authored tag being applied to the code I publish.

I review and test my code before it’s published to make sure that it works and that it’s the right solution to the problem, and I’m the one responsible for fixing it if it goes wrong late at night in prod.

That was the case when I was using Intellisense and codegen tools and that’s still the case now.

That makes me the author.

Anything else is a lie, a violation of engineering ethics, and is flat out not SOC2, nor regulatorily compliant for anything that matters.

Acquaint with better people.

Trash article and consequently, I no longer trust this outlet.

You want to write an article about purchasing HIMARS then write an article about that. Talk about their role and capabilities and alternatives.

This is just trash that says 'the US used HIMARS in Iran and the US in Iran is bad therefore HIMARS bad. Like yeah, the US also used solar panels in Iran are they bad too?

Ukraine has overwhelming found HIMARs effective in their defense against Russia, is that even mentioned once in the article?

/im14AndThisIsDeep

How about a fund that spreads out the money globally?

How about reinstating US international AID at a bare minimum?

Pretty horseshit to act like they trained AI on only American data so only Americans should benefit.

What about the literal entire rest of the world? They get nothing right?

Just another example of America exploiting the world for their own benefit. Even the good ones are so corrupted by their system that they do it without realizing.