There's an "export to Canva" button in Claude Design, so perhaps they're hoping this will be another entry point for new users, or that they'll be able to "lock in" as the default design software for Claude users.
Our mission is to empower the world to design, and we believe in making Canva available in every place where ideas begin. Being the most interoperable platform creates mutually better products, more value for community, and more value and growth for our company.
We've been working closely with Anthropic for many years, and we see this as complementary. Our MCP, integrations, and plugins have already introduced millions of new users to the full power of Canva, and we're excited to continue doubling down here.
> ChatGPT responds with a fully-populated HTML template. All I have to do is copy and paste it into a new file in my project, run my custom script, and then push the changes.
This actually sounds more troublesome to me than adding a markdown file into a Git repo somewhere, and having Hugo/Astro/whatever automagically regenerate all the HTML files from markdown.
But that's probably because static site hosting services have come very far from the S3 bucket days.
The "build step" with Hugo/Astro might be slightly simpler. But as mentioned in the post, I find it surprisingly nice not to have to write strict Markdown. It turns out (at least for me) that formatting with Markdown still feels akin to creating a finished product. It's nice to just be able to type something out without thinking too much and have the LLM "get what you mean".
Wouldn't this mean we're even more cooked? I've seen this page cited a few times as evidence that Mythos is no big deal, but if true then the same big deal is already out there with other models today.
This would just speed up the discovery -> patch cycle, at least until such time that all the low hanging fruit (=represented in training data) is patched.
Though another possibility would be that since LLMs generate so much code, the LLM vulnerability discovery would just keep chugging along and we'd simply settle for the same amount of potential vulns, same relative vulnerability-exploit-patch dynamics, though higher in absolute numbers.
I would respect Ed (and Gary Marcus) more if they would concede the occasional point. But everything AI is always a hyperbolic and unqualified disaster. I suppose that's what the audience wants.
"every bit of AI demand ... that exists only exists due to subsidies"
Really? NOBODY would pay whatever the fully-loaded cost is? What about people running local models on their own GPUs? Are they being subsidized too?
I like to read Ed (and Gary) as a counterbalance to the AI hype that is pervasive.
But Ed reads more and more like he has been personally wronged by the AI companies and is on a righteous crusade to destroy them. He has plenty of valid criticisms, but he comes across like he has his head in the sand when he can't seem to acknowledge any potential upside at all related to AI. It's starting to feel like he's just interpreting news and events to fit his worldview, which isn't that valuable as a reader (unless I want that worldview affirmed for me).
To everyone saying "we've done this before" or "we're not even landing" - we have sent humans to the Moon a total of 9 times. This is the 10th. Nobody has been out there in 50+ years. We've only landed on the Moon 6 times, and this mission is a stepping stone to future manned landings.
Do people really feel like "yeah, we went 9 times, that's enough, no need to ever send anyone again"?
Not "no need to ever send anyone again" but it's certainly not very interesting at this point. Maybe it's worth the spend, maybe not, but either way I don't find doing something a 10th time very intriguing. It first happened in the 60s. My father isn't even old enough to remember it. Doing the same thing as then, today, is very hard to care about. Might as well tell me that we're inventing a 10th form factor for a vinyl record.
The 1960s and 70s were extremely turbulent, chaotic times in the US - the Civil Rights era, the Vietnam War, the Cold War, multiple high-profile assassinations, etc. Apollo 8 launched at the end of 1968, which was a famously challenging year with many disruptive events.
Of course we have many challenges today as well, but I don't think the political environment is unprecedented. One could easily have argued in the 60s that we should be focusing on civil rights, ending the Vietnam War, etc. instead of going to the moon. In fact, much of the messaging around space in the 60s that allowed those missions to happen was based around "war weapons" and the Space Race with the Soviets.
One could argue the Apollo program itself was responsible for creating a lot of the hope you mention.
reply