Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5

Post by slopinthebag » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 6:27 PM UTC

echelon wrote: post #230

slopinthebag wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lmao. Have more respect for your elders, who wrote all the code that your ai psychosis is fuelled by.

Every single thing around you was pioneered by people who are dead and forgotten. From the materials science of the clothes you wear, to the very language you speak. Get over yourself. We're all ephemeral, dead and recycled in the blink of an eye. Our species doesn't even clock on the geologic timespan. If you think your code (or any of your artifacts or possessions) matter beyond their immediate utility, you're mist…

Post by Rover222 » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 6:28 PM UTC

dakolli wrote: post #69

dzonga wrote: post #43

Chinese models brought the building down. are export controls the right thing ? Probably not. but the american economy is over-exposed on "A.I" - the capital expenditure, while the Chinese are proving you don't need to spend tons of capital to get close to the frontier. the Chinese have better building capacity & cheaper energy. that means the market has to correct at some point.

I trust Chinese companies with my data way more than the corporations of the 4th Reich.

Post by spacedcowboy » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 6:30 PM UTC

energy123 wrote: post #585

spacedcowboy wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, this is not necessarily a problem for the EU. Some might say it's a goal. The USA is far more dangerous a "friend" than China is an acquaintance. China has not been threatening military annexation, China does not randomly start trade (or real) wars. China doesn't just turn away from international commitments. Bottom line: China is a far better international partner than the USA.

> China has not been threatening military annexation They've been doing military annexation right now in the South China Sea. > China does not randomly start trade (or real) wars. The invasion of Vietnam? The subsidization of industry and pegging their FX? > China doesn't just turn away from international commitments. Abandoning Ukraine despite being a signatory to an agreement that assures their defense? This is not…

Post by slopinthebag » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 6:35 PM UTC

Schiendelman wrote: post #252

AdieuToLogic wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is not how most engineers define bad code. The engineers I have worked with most definitely define "bad code" as having intrinsic limitations and/or latent defects which impact successful system functionality/operation. Indicators provided to stakeholders such as yourself which support this assessment are, but not limited to: - the system doesn't work that way - the system lacks test coverage, so changes take…

Please stop being rude to me. I'm a human being, I'm a very experienced product manager and engineer (you can google my name, I'm the only one), and the way you are behaving sucks. Everything you're saying is true, sometimes. Assume I'm still right, and that you might be able to learn something from someone else.

Post by slopinthebag » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 6:45 PM UTC

cjbgkagh wrote: post #101

K0balt wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This x 10 . I don’t understand how people are saying you can’t use LLMs to get crazy productivity gains. If you can’t write quality code with LLMs at ludicrous speed, you’re holding it wrong. You will have occasional bad days and regressions. But overall you’re still going to be able to 4x your progress.

I wonder if the people getting 10x productivity gains are spending less time on HN and more time tending to their agents. Personally I now spend so much time productively arguing with agents that it feels like an utter waste of effort arguing with humans, if people can't see the value in LLMs by now I'm not sure what I could say to change their minds.