Business & time are business model stress tests.
AI is a business model stress test
91–100 of 361 posts
Re: AI is a business model stress test
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
> lossy compression algorithm is not "inspired" when it is fed copyrighted input That's exactly what happens when you read. Copyrighted input fed straight into your brain, a lossy storage and processing machine.
I think it’s a pretty easy principle that machines are not people and people learning should be treated differently than machines learning
[deleted]
Re: AI is a business model stress test
#93In my opinion LLMs are intellectual property theft. Just as if I started distributing copies of books. This substantially reduces the incentive for the creation of new IP. All written text, art work, etc needs to come imbued with a GPL style license: if you train your model on this, your weights and training code must be published.
This is one way to look at it.
The other way is to argue that LLMs democratize access to knowledge. Anyone has access to all ever written by humanity.
Crazy impressive if you ask me.
Re: AI is a business model stress test
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
> lossy compression algorithm is not "inspired" when it is fed copyrighted input That's exactly what happens when you read. Copyrighted input fed straight into your brain, a lossy storage and processing machine.
I think it’s a pretty easy principle that machines are not people and people learning should be treated differently than machines learning
You see this principle in privacy laws too.
I can be in a room looking at something with my eyeballs and listening with my ears perfectly legally... But it would not be legal if I replaced myself with a humanoid mannequin with a video camera for a head.
Re: AI is a business model stress test
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Making GitHub actions runners more reliable, stable and economical would hurt Microsoft. Can you explain this one a bit? I know some folks who would absolutely increase their spend if Actions runners were better. As it stands I've seen folks trying to move off of them.
Gh actions runners had a dubious implementation of sleep that would cause runners to hang on 100% usage for weeks/months. A simple fix was proposed and neglected for 10 years. This discussion resurfaced recently with zig abandoning GitHub entirely and criticizing this specific issue. A fix was them merged following an announcement that self hosted runners will now be charged by the minute. Of course this two facts ar…
How does this support your point? If we're saying "they fixed it because there was pressure to"... okay? That's the parents point - tons of people are going to move off over bad performance, and Github was incentivized to fix it when people started moving off.
If Github's incentive was to keep it slow... we wouldn't have seen exactly what you're describing.
Re: AI is a business model stress test
#96In my opinion LLMs are intellectual property theft. Just as if I started distributing copies of books. This substantially reduces the incentive for the creation of new IP. All written text, art work, etc needs to come imbued with a GPL style license: if you train your model on this, your weights and training code must be published.
I stopped writing open source projects on github because why put a bunch of work into something for others to train off of without any regard for the original projects
https://www.softwareheritage.org/ will index it anyway.
Also, if you publish your code in your own server, it will be DDoSed to death by the many robots that will try to scrape it simultaneously.
Re: AI is a business model stress test
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gh actions runners had a dubious implementation of sleep that would cause runners to hang on 100% usage for weeks/months. A simple fix was proposed and neglected for 10 years. This discussion resurfaced recently with zig abandoning GitHub entirely and criticizing this specific issue. A fix was them merged following an announcement that self hosted runners will now be charged by the minute. Of course this two facts ar…
How does this support your point? If we're saying "they fixed it because there was pressure to"... okay? That's the parents point - tons of people are going to move off over bad performance, and Github was incentivized to fix it when people started moving off. If Github's incentive was to keep it slow... we wouldn't have seen exactly what you're describing.
The fix already existed and was neglected for a decade. It was a 3 lines of bash code.
The big would commonly make a runner hang forever unnoticed, on a platform that charged by the minute.
One minute hanging, was one minute charged.
The fix that would drop considerably the amount of total minutes charged was immediately followed by charging self hosted runners by the minute.
>GitHub incentive was to make it fast.
They charge by the minute. The faster it completes the action, less money. Runner go fast pocket go low
Re: AI is a business model stress test
#98Tailwind Labs relied on a weird monetization scheme. Revenue was proportional to the pain of using the framework. The sudden improvement in getting desired UI without relying on pre-built templates killed Tailwind Labs. There are many initiatives in a similar spot, improving your experience at using Next.js would hurt Vercel. Making GitHub actions runners more reliable, stable and economical would hurt Microsoft. Imp…
> If suddenly CSS became pleasant to use, Tailwind would be in a rough spot.
CSS is pleasant to use. I know I find it pleasant to use; and I know there are quite a few frontend developers who do too. I didn't pay much attention to tailwind, until suddenly I realized that it has spread like wildfire and now is everywhere. What drove that growth? Which groups were the first adopters of tailwind; how did they grow; when did the growth skyrocket? Why did it not stay as niche as, say, htmx?
Re: AI is a business model stress test
#99Maybe they just over-hired for their business model.
Re: AI is a business model stress test
#100Tailwind Labs relied on a weird monetization scheme. Revenue was proportional to the pain of using the framework. The sudden improvement in getting desired UI without relying on pre-built templates killed Tailwind Labs. There are many initiatives in a similar spot, improving your experience at using Next.js would hurt Vercel. Making GitHub actions runners more reliable, stable and economical would hurt Microsoft. Imp…
> If suddenly CSS became pleasant to use, Tailwind would be in a rough spot. CSS is pleasant to use. I know I find it pleasant to use; and I know there are quite a few frontend developers who do too. I didn't pay much attention to tailwind, until suddenly I realized that it has spread like wildfire and now is everywhere. What drove that growth? Which groups were the first adopters of tailwind; how did they grow; when…
I used plain CSS for more than a decade and felt the benefits of Tailwind within 10 minutes of getting started. What fueled the growth of Tailwind is that it makes web development palpably easier.