Remember, Open Weight doesn't necc. mean local. They are probably running on a larger version online, closer to Claude specs. (lol and probably distilled from Claude)
This is how I feel about AI coding in general. I see business users getting excited about building 60% of an application themselves - but have zero clue that the remaining 40% will take 5x as long, and oh, by the way, you now have to maintain it for the next decade - and what happens when you leave and no one can figure out why payroll doesn't work anymore?
I didn’t take it that way at all. I took it as “I was blinded from the actual solution because my vision was artificially narrow due to my past experiences with this person.” They didn’t ask for help, their partner intervened for them with a completely different and more direct approach.
I have a kid going thru this right now. It’s very disheartening and frustrating to see, because even with coaching and help, they don’t see the help and suggestions as solutions because they simply can’t see it. And as a parent you don’t want to have to intervene, you want them to learn how to dig their way out of it. But it’s tough to get them to dig when they don’t believe in shovels.
I guess I really don’t like this message because I am a disabled person. In the exercise that she describes where an instructor tells people to stand up from a position that they think they can’t stand up from, what if I actually can’t stand up? It might lead me to believe that perhaps I’m simply not trying enough.
You might think this contrived, but when people tell you over and over that you’re not trying hard enough because of things you can’t control, you internalize it.
To me — someone who has to ask for help — it seems like that she didn’t really notice that help was the thing that helped.
What if the cops, the friend, and the consulate all said, "we do not care about a random mentally ill stranger, on a different continent, sending threats. You said he's been doing this for years and has done nothing yet? Sounds like you're safe. We have real crimes to solve. We have real murders to figure out. Call back if he shows up at your house, but he most certainly never will." Or maybe the FBI is like "oh, okay. Thanks. We'll keep an eye out but now this guy's part of an investigation so we can't talk about him to you." and then they do nothing, the friend doesn't reply, and the consulate is like "we're not obligated to reply." Those seem like super likely conclusions to the husband helping, too. So then would that have no longer been the "actual solution?" It seems that the "actual solution" is only determined after the fact once there is a success, and that's used as a proxy for whether or not the actions were really trying. If she had never replied and then the guy stopped texting after a year, would that have also been Actually Trying? Maybe it would've, because one could come up with a post-hoc explanation as to why that was an Actual Try. It feels sloppy to not distinguish what makes something a form of an Actual Try vs a successful try, because Actually Trying should be able to count failures as part of sincere attempts. Otherwise, Actually Trying collapses into being a synonym for success.
I might consider F1 in that case as it has gained in popularity a lot, and technically it’s owned by a U.S. company, but I’d never think of it as a U.S. league.
I think OP’s point is that the demand is being met elsewhere. The Premier League has exploded in popularity in the US because of accesible TV. It is easier than ever to watch foreign sports and you do not have to deal with local blackout garbage.
As someone who isn't much of a sports fan but will occasionally watch, I've found Premier League more interesting than US major leagues because of the promotion/relegation system.
With US leagues once it becomes clear what teams are in contention for winning the championship that year, games between the rest teams become a lot less interesting.
With Premier League, teams are fighting for the championship, just like in US leagues. The team that finishes #1 is the champion.
But they are also fighting to get into the next UEFA Champions League season. UEFA Champions League is a league for the top clubs from several European country top leagues. The top 4 Premier League finishers make it (so the Premier League champion and the next 3 teams).
There's also a fight for the #5 spot, because that team gets into the Europa League group stage.
Meanwhile the teams at the bottom of the Premier League are also fighting. The teams that finish in the last 3 places get kicked out of the Premier League!
They get moved to the the EFL Championship League. (Not to be confused with UEFA Champions. UEFA Champions is the league with the best teams from Europe. EFL Championship is a league for UK teams that are not quite good enough for Premier League).
Those 3 teams that get kicked down to EFL Championship League are replaced with the 3 top teams from EFL Championship League. (And it doesn't stop there...there are 7 more levels of leagues blow EFL Championship League, with promotion/relegation between each adjacent level).
Premier League has 20 teams and with 5 top spots to fight for and 3 bottom spots to fight to avoid you can get a long way into the season with 3/4 of the teams still having either a realistic shot of making the top 5 or in danger of not staying clear of the bottom 3.
Claude can use use tools to do that, and some different code indexer MCPs work, but that depends on the LLM doing the coding to make the right searches to find the code. If you are in a project where your helper functions or shared libs are scattered everywhere it’s a lot harder.
Just like with humans it definitely works better if you follow good naming conventions and file patterns. And even then I tend to make sure to just include the important files in the context or clue the LLM in during the prompt.
It also depends on what language you use. A LOT. During the day I use LLMs with dotnet and it’s pretty rough compared to when I’m using rails on my side projects. Dotnet requires a lot more prompting and hand holding, both due to its complexity but also due to how much more verbose it is.
Once AI is fully writing software autonomously and humans don’t need to see that code anymore, then why not just have AI write iteratively more efficient assembly? (Meaning make the software work then turn it over to an optimization agent that can drive out all inefficiencies until perfection.)
Those efficiencies will eventually be driven into all parts of the system. AI will be able to run the most efficient code on the most efficiently designed processors, that can be designed with the knowledge that only AI is going to use them. And then we can remove ALL the weird abstractions and accommodations we had to make for human brains.
I’m not saying it will happen tomorrow but language choice is just a temporary concern.
I keep seeing this argument pop up about “should Obama be prosecuted” like it’s some sort of “gotcha liberal!”
And as a liberal I think “hell YES he should be prosecuted!” The government shouldn’t just go around killing citizens without due process. I don’t care what letter is by their name.
> Imagine the civil war if the union couldn't kill confederates.
A full scale civil war really is an extraordinary case and is a lot more akin to a regular war than what we are talking about here.
I'm more afraid of someone declaring war on an abstract concept (like the "war on terror") and then using broad powers meant to be used in normal wars between states that have declared combatants than I am of a civil war.
I wonder how that would play out in today's Congress. There is technically no country to declare war on, unless you can declare war on yourself, so they would have to first redefine the United States as two parts. After that is passed, they could declare war on the opposing half. I guess I'm kind of seeing how the Chinese governments got themselves tied up in knots with their continuity of state and all.
I'd imagine that you can declare war on a specific group (that does not have to be defined as a state) like the "confederate states of america" without it having to be a nebulous concept like "terror". But I don't know enough to say for certain.
If we have a declared war between the US and the people (US citizens or otherwise) who are taking up arms against the US, then sure, attack away.
But otherwise, the only remedy should be judicial process against these people: arrests, trial, etc. Otherwise we have a term for it: extrajudicial killing.
Of course, Congress has given the executive branch weird war powers over the past few decades, so legally I'm sure they're in the clear, unfortunately.
That's the appropriate patriotic response that you'd hope all Americans would give, especially those who have sworn to defend the constitution. But what I've come to realize is that a lot of Americans somehow see it as their patriotic duty to destroy the Federal government, and will support anything that will undermine it, including breaking the rule of law and a scorched earth attack on "liberals" that wish to uphold our form of government. This is the legacy of the Confederate grievance that is still very much alive today.
I hear the same shit a lot. IRL, and in right wing media. “They don’t seem to get that if they can prosecute Trump, we can prosecute Biden and Hillary for [any of several shaky charges]”
No, no: we do get that. We just think that’s a good thing. If you have the evidence (you don’t, or we’d have seen, like, any of it at all) then by all means, prosecute the absolute shit out of them!
I worked with a Navy Vet in the 1990s that would play Harpoon and reported that it was pretty much just like sitting in the sub looking at his displays. I don’t know how true that was, but I remember them marketing it as something that the Navy used in training.
I loaded it up once and decided that I really wasn’t into games I had to study for.
reply