Text to me: What are ou going Doing Text from me: sorry. dancing
10.03.2026 17:42 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0Text to me: What are ou going Doing Text from me: sorry. dancing
10.03.2026 17:42 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0
In my headcanon, The Barbican killed
Leon Krier, donβt try to convince me otherwise
increpare releases a game β I buy it
10.03.2026 17:19 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0Surveillance is not a purely philosophical issue with purely esoteric harms. Surveillance is a sensitive and often faulty trigger that summons armed agents of the state with impunity that can take away a person's freedom.
10.03.2026 16:00 β π 53 π 28 π¬ 1 π 1unfortunately I was born to be this kind of nuancebro. I am just becoming more myself
10.03.2026 16:34 β π 5 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0
should have asked what people think of ChatGPT too. people hate "big tech" but when you ask about individual companies they love them all
xcancel.com/davidshor/st...
she is committed to the bit. enjoy the tambourine dance at the end
10.03.2026 15:37 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0when claude is good enough, "just a claude agent SDK wrapper" can do a whole lot!
10.03.2026 15:04 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0
heh, did you catch this? I don't think it's the most rigorous way to make the argument but I agree with the direction β I think people are way overstating the amount of subsidy
news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4731...
I agree however that breaking things up into better pieces is an important part of dealing with this
10.03.2026 15:02 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0a beautiful old greenish-gray stone building on the upenn campus. statue of ben franklin in foreground
and what a building!
10.03.2026 15:01 β π 3 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0this doesn't solve the problem because even if you break them up into more reviewable pieces, we're still producing more of them, plus they can interact
10.03.2026 14:23 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 2 π 0this is what I was getting at here β there are only returns to someone spending more time to review code if they are uniquely well positioned to review that exact code. I think that describes fewer actual code reviewers than we would like
10.03.2026 06:01 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0I think it depends a lot on the quality of review you get for that $30. even at $100k, $25 is 30 minutes of dev time (generously). I don't find it hard to imagine the bot review being significantly better than 30 min of $100k dev review time. it's probably better than 30 min of my time
10.03.2026 05:57 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0I know you're kidding, but that is exactly what this is doing for the $20
10.03.2026 05:03 β π 2 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0the relevant unit isn't really the individual PR, it's aggregate bugs found. you'd pay $30 per PR because you don't know which ones will turn up bugs and which won't. if you knew a PR didn't have bugs you would just merge it
10.03.2026 04:07 β π 3 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0right, exactly. $30 is like 10 minutes of my time and what's the likelihood I have the exact expertise to review your PR
10.03.2026 03:24 β π 2 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0well Iβm sure part of it is checking initial positives against the code and running tests and stuff
10.03.2026 02:10 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0yeah their innovation here is doing it 10 times lol
10.03.2026 02:08 β π 2 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0Again Zitronβto his creditβaccurately describes the situation, but doesnβt realize heβs giving away the game entirely if he admits that people are choosing to pay for higher quality. Because model developers hit a wall of diminishing returns, and the only way to make their models do more was to make them burn more tokens to generate a more accurate response (this is a very simple way of describing reasoning, a thing that OpenAI launched in September 2024 and others followed). As a result, all the βgainsβ from βpowerful new modelsβ come from burning more and more tokens.
this is why I say here Zitron is giving the game away when he says oh, people are only getting better results by paying more for them. thatβs the whole thing working as well as it could!
crespo.business/posts/cost-o...
really hope this round of touring gets us some high-quality live studio recordings. this is 6 years old. the world deserves more
10.03.2026 01:21 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0spotify listener counts suggest not enough of you know who Aldous Harding is
10.03.2026 01:14 β π 7 π 1 π¬ 4 π 1wholesome midwest content: my 7yo reading about all the native plants in the Prairie Moon Nursery catalog www.prairiemoon.com
09.03.2026 23:40 β π 25 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0
I don't think people have grasped yet that if you were really confident the tokens were good, you would never stop jamming money in the machine
same reason successful companies grow: they're machines that turn labor and money into more money. add more labor and more money and you get more money
can't believe you didn't think of it yourself. too perfect
09.03.2026 23:00 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0
anyone can make an LLM barf out tokens β whatβs hard is useful tokens. benchmarks like ARG-AGI 2 show the effect of more tokens. note the S-shapes: you have gains for a while, but eventually more tokens donβt help. the smarter the model is, the farther more tokens take you
arcprize.org/leaderboard
they might skim over it for egregious errors or confusing explanations, but there are rapidly diminishing returns to more time because their expertise does not make those extra minutes useful. but a UI expert can spend hours reviewing and still turn up problems and worthwhile considerations
09.03.2026 22:56 β π 11 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0it's clarifying to compare this to people working in or out of their area of expertise. say I have a pretty big UI change β if I ask someone who is not a UI dev to review it, how much time is it worth it for them to spend on that? probably not much
09.03.2026 22:56 β π 10 π 0 π¬ 1 π 1