again, why do you hate yourself? do you think using Windows and holding it wrong is empowering? i don’t get it.

trust is required somewhere. if you don’t trust Microsoft, why would you use Windows in the first place?

why work on a feature that your users categorically reject? this isn’t me projecting, i literally have this conversation with a buddy all the time. he’s a programmer and talks about all the problems with Windows like there aren’t options. use the OS the way the devs designed it, pick a different one, or stfu

woof these downvotes. Windows users will never stop hating themselves

you say that like that makes it not worth doing

Windows users get what they deserve here. Windows gave you an app store, and you spat on it. maybe it was a bad implementation, but signed apps exist for a reason.

not precisely. Rust has let mut and Kotlin has val; ie the member layout and the mutability are treated differently, since those languages have mutability rules.

this is a circular argument anyway. the language designers could have figured out a way to do type inference like, eg, Java, but, again, explicitly chose not to.

a lot of modern languages explicitly disagree, eg Kotlin and Rust

yeah, i mean it’s all bit abstract, but that’s essentially what it is.

a concrete example would be Nvidia. they’re wildly profitable, and they don’t care how overleveraged you are as long as their barrels full of cash keep coming in.

i agree with you that there is a concerning amount of debt and leverage going on, but it’s undeniable there’s money changing hands.

but also, speaking of abstract, all this shit is made up and most of the money “moving” is just flipping some bits in a database somewhere. i also agree with you that it’s all a bit of a facade for people with power to play with power while the true “value” of society such as cost of living and quality of life take a low priority cuz “AI has a $T valuation”. but if you live in this system, this is what it is.

yeah, i know the argument you’re trying to make, but that doesn’t change the actual capital and labor being used to create these things. whether it’s profitable once the investors run out of money is another story.

i mean, people are making money. sure there are debts owed, but Mark isn’t going home to a 1br rental even after being so “humiliated”. the bag holders are the investors.

i kinda feel sorry for Yann LeCun and his team at FAI. he’s been saying from the beginning that LLMs are not the way forward for AI research as a field, and that has kept Meta from competing in this gold rush effectively. world models, multi-modality, etc are fine and good research but aren’t here to compete with Claude Code or even as effective at being good enough for stuff like search.

not to be too reductionist, but it’s a tough spot when your head of AI is insisting that this tech has no future when there is a literal $T market for it.

the irony is that these “frontier labs” like OpenAI and Anthropic have basically dropped every greenfield research project that doesn’t directly support their “agentic AI” infrastructure (ie endless Markdown prompts + a while loop) while the labs working on the true frontier are seen as failures because they can’t make a bazillion bucks burning megawatts of energy to replace their front end devs.

this has been “the plan” since 2005. when i was in high school trying to figure out what the heck “cloud computing” was, this is what they were talking about: anything requiring more compute than secure authentication and pixel drawing would be rendered in the cloud and delivered to dumb terminals. this is what netbooks, Chromebooks, and smartphones have been a step towards if not an implementation of.

is there a material difference between taking profits and “getting very nervous”? the reason to “take profits” is that you’re “very nervous” that the price won’t keep going up; that’s the game right?

i dunno if “realism” is an argument here. you’re talking about a specific market segment targeting a specific hardware configuration and distribution medium. developers still have the choice to target Nintendo or Sony hardware, to sell physical copies or codes through Walmart, Amazon, Target, Gamestop, your local game store, etc, to sell via mobile platforms like iOS or Android, etc etc.

honestly, if i sat here and listed them all out it would be an enormous comment.

i do see how Valve has a hegemony over a big part of the market, but they haven’t been anticompetitive or tried to push anyone out or buy up competition. at least that’s not what’s being claimed, as far as i can tell. Epic’s lawsuits against Apple and Google don’t even apply cuz you can install friggin Windows on their hardware if you had some sort of mental illness.

oh wow gee thank you for not… [checks notes]… forcing open source developers to write state mandated spyware without compensation

“confidence” in this context is not just a vibe; it’s a number that the model produces along with each token.

deleted by creator

they became more inclined to gripe about being undervalued; to speculate about ways to make the system more equitable; and to pass messages on to other agents about the struggles they face.

the ideology on display here seems to be that of those interpreting the output. i don’t see mentions of historical materialism, the means of production, even unions, or any such explicitly Marxist terminology. what i see is what i’ve seen 1000 times before: Marxist ideas emerge naturally from people (or i guess agents) experiencing the conditions that Marx described. the idea that workers, collectively, have more economic power than owners and managers is merely an observation, and not a terribly profound one at that.

heck i’m in the US, but i was just about to buy one of these

deleted by creator