681–690 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want the neoclassical version: What happens when there is an oligopoly in the supply of labor? Same answer. Nothing good for the consumers of labor.
Technological improvements shift supply curves right which is good for consumers.
> One engineer at NVIDIA who had early access to the model went as far as to say: "Losing access to GPT‑5.5 feels like I've had a limb amputated.” This quote is more sinister than I think was intended; it likely applies to all frontier coding models. As they get better, we quickly come to rely on them for coding. It's like playing a game on God Mode. Engineers become dependent; it's truly addictive. This matches my o…
1. I only have ONE SOTA model integrated into the IDE (I am mostly on Elixir, so I use Gemini). I ensure I use this sparingly for issues I don't really have time to invest or are basically rabbit holes eg. Anything to do with Javascript or its ecosystem). My job is mostly on the backend anyway.
2. For actual backend architecture. I always do the high level architecture myself. Eg. DDD. Then I literally open up gemini.google.com or claude.ai on the browser, copy paste existing code base into the code base, physically leavey chair to go make coffee or a quick snack. This forces me to mentally process that using AI is a chore.
Previously, I was on tight Codex integration and leaving the licensing fears aside, it became too good in writing Elixir code that really stopped me from "thinking" aka using my brain. It felt good for the first few weeks but I later realised the dependence it created. So I said fuck it, and completely cancelled my subscription because it was too good at my job.I believe this is the only way that we won't end up like in Wall-E sitting infront of giant screens just becoming mere blobs of flesh.
I like that its more consistent than the 4o and o4 days but still 5.4, 5.3, 5.2, etc still are a mess, for example 5.2 and 5.1 don't have mini models and 5.3 was codex only. Anthropic is slightly better but where is 4.6 or 4.7 haiku or 4.7 sonnet etc.
Opus 4.7 feels worse for me than 4.6, and that's not even taking into account the 50% extra tokens at 3x the price
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What? In what way does companies becoming dependent on AI chatbots will solve the world-spanning problem of resource scarcity? The hell?
The idea is that cheap and readily available and upgradeable intelligence is going to massively increase our purchasing power and what everyone can order for the same cost basically. If artificial doctors are cents on hour then you can see how that changes our behaviors and level of life. But on the other hand from the other direction there is a wage decrease incoming from increased competition at the same time. What…
But we will have to (painfully) shed our current hierarchies before that comes to pass.
> One engineer at NVIDIA who had early access to the model went as far as to say: "Losing access to GPT‑5.5 feels like I've had a limb amputated.” This quote is more sinister than I think was intended; it likely applies to all frontier coding models. As they get better, we quickly come to rely on them for coding. It's like playing a game on God Mode. Engineers become dependent; it's truly addictive. This matches my o…
I use local models on a Mac mini for most things and fall back to the hosted ones when they can't get the job done. Of course you have to break the work into smaller pieces yourself that a local model can understand. One good side effect of this is that you end up actually learning the code and how it's structured.
> One engineer at NVIDIA who had early access to the model went as far as to say: "Losing access to GPT‑5.5 feels like I've had a limb amputated.” This quote is more sinister than I think was intended; it likely applies to all frontier coding models. As they get better, we quickly come to rely on them for coding. It's like playing a game on God Mode. Engineers become dependent; it's truly addictive. This matches my o…
You are 100% right to be cautious about this. That's why as stupid as it sounds, I've purposely made my workflow with AI full of friction: 1. I only have ONE SOTA model integrated into the IDE (I am mostly on Elixir, so I use Gemini). I ensure I use this sparingly for issues I don't really have time to invest or are basically rabbit holes eg. Anything to do with Javascript or its ecosystem). My job is mostly on the b…
With Claude code, or codex, I am able to build enough of an understanding of dependencies like the front end, or data jobs, that I can make meaningful contributions that are worth a review from another human (code review). You have up obviously explore the code, one prompt isn’t enough, but limiting yourself is an odd choice.
This doesn't have API access yet, but OpenAI seem to approve of the Codex API backdoor used by OpenClaw these days... https://twitter.com/steipete/status/2046775849769148838 and https://twitter.com/romainhuet/status/2038699202834841962 And that backdoor API has GPT-5.5. So here's a pelican: https://simonwillison.net/2026/Apr/23/gpt-5-5/#and-some-peli... I used this new plugin for LLM: https://github.com/simonw/llm-op…
I made pelicans at different thinking efforts: https://hcker.news/pelican-low.svg https://hcker.news/pelican-medium.svg https://hcker.news/pelican-high.svg https://hcker.news/pelican-xhigh.svg Someone needs to make a pelican arena, I have no idea if these are considered good or not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
LLMs upend a few centuries of labor theory. The current market is predicated on the assumption that labor is atomic and has little bargaining power (minus unions). While capital has huge bargaining power and can effectively put whatever price it wants on labor (in markets where labor is plentiful, which is most of them). What happens to a company used to extracting surplus value from labor when the labor is provided…
LLMs don't upend anything about labor theory, good grief. Technologists really have no concept of history beyond their own lives do they? Labor saving/efficiency devices have been introduced throughout capitalisms entire history multiple times and the results are always the same; they don't benefit workers and capitalists extract as much value as they can. LLMs aren't any different.
Everyone talked about the marketing stunt that was Anthropic's gated Mythos model with an 83% result on CyberGym. OpenAI just dropped GPT 5.5, which scores 82% and is open for anybody to use. I recommend anybody in offensive/defensive cybersecurity to experiment with this. This is the real data point we needed - without the hype! Never thought I'd say this but OpenAI is the 'open' option again.
Doesn't OpenAI get mad if you ask cybersecurity questions and force you to upload a government ID, otherwise they'll silently route you to a less capable model? > Developers and security professionals doing cybersecurity-related work or similar activity that could be mistaken by automated detection systems may have requests rerouted to GPT-5.2 as a fallback. https://developers.openai.com/codex/concepts/cyber-safety h…
I don't like that trend. I get why they're doing it, but I don't like it
"our strongest set of safeguards to date" How much capability is lost, by hobbling models with a zillion protections against idiots? Every prompt gets evaluated, to ensure you are not a hacker, you are not suicidal, you are not a racist, you are not... Maybe just...leave that all off? I know, I know, individual responsibility no longer exists, but I can dream.