tech people will clown on this but I think its pretty genius

The average person does not care to use their Muse to optimize their life for productivity. they use ai assistants to shoot the shit and maybe cancel subscriptions they no longer use. Anthropomorphizing the mascot and making tamagotchis is much better for engagement

when would someone use this over a smart watch

1. its cute and fun and you can check out ur friends' muse

2. Muse itself is a sandboxed agent that will magically do things for you

the average person had no idea how to set up openclaw

Muse / Instinct were the first to do frictionless setup at scale (Poke was technically 'first' but not sure how large they got before acq)

no i am talking about ppl who had elaborate openclaw setups now they are hawking muse

"I recently heard" cmon brother its in the article

if the listings are open for the reasons OP stated, then yes it does indicate a shortage. if companies hired all the SWEs they wanted they wouldn't still have the listings

100% untrue.

Let's say I have 50 employees working for $100,000 each.

Why would I not want to replace 25 of them that are willing to work for $50,000 each if they are producing anywhere close to the same quality.

In a case like this always open job listings are a warning to others.

Also there is something called market sampling. Where you put up these job openings and look at the quality of applicants in relation to the employees you already have to ensure you're on the right track internally.

> In a case like this always open job listings are a warning to others

‘Warning this company has management practices oriented around remaining solvent for the long term, rather than providing a sinecure for workers’?

Warning: This company will replace your ass so far without regard to your actual abilities or their current profitability.

Companies do not have human rights. They are a pleasant fiction the population allows because it's more effective than not having said rules. We the people can revoke those rules the moment the meta-idea of corporations no longer serve the public good.

In the US at least we seemingly have come to believe the corporation is the ultimate organism and all rights should be sacrificed for its eternal cancerous growth.

Not every company is a hungry startup trying to hustle their way to a billion dollars. Businesses also value stability, and stable labor is a big factor in pretty much every other field.

You don't get stability by laying off workers every 2 years .

because the pie grows, and if you are in a competitive market which most businesses are in, you don't want to lose talent and market prestige to your competitors

> if companies hired all the SWEs they wanted they wouldn't still have the listings

I honestly can't tell if this a troll or not, but in case it isn't:

Because "number job openings" are used as a signal of company health, Ghost Jobs are far far more common than job listings which companies intend to hire from!

Is this true? some of the highest aura companies have very limited jobs open to signal exclusivity, or have such a high bar that they are in perpetual shortage

And large cos are always hiring

Big companies never hire all the SWEs they want, because there is always attrition. At a certain scale, there will always be people leaving and a constant need to backfill.

Exactly, hence why having jobs open indicates a shortage.

HN discovers competition leads to lower prices

source? p sure they said they were confident they did not access the researcher's chats

you use evals to measure nondeterministic behavior and abstract deterministic behavior behind tools

Famously, Microsoft stop progressing after 2000. Facebook disappeared after 2008. BTC stopped appreciating since 2013. All the investors in these trends regretted it.

Yeah again, you’re confusing wealth accumulation for progress.

I don't think intelligence needs to take the shape of human-like intelligence, nor human-like data efficiency.

I'd argue they are intelligent entities, superhuman in some ways due to being run on silicon but extremely data inefficient with nonobvious failure modes.

>I don't think intelligence needs to take the shape of human-like intelligence

But then the word doesn't mean anything. Intelligence is almost by definition what we're like.

If you think LLMs are intelligent, you have to concede that databases are also intelligent. And if you can't then you need to ponder deeply about what quality of an LLM's response to your query makes it (seem) more "intelligent" than a database's response to your SQL query, beyond the trivial thing that it's in natural language.

No, it's not. We don't really have a good definition of intelligence. If we can imagine non-carbon based life forms, I don't think its a leap to imagine non-human brain based intelligence (octopi?)

> If you think LLMs are intelligent, you have to concede that databases are also intelligent.

No, I don't. The mechanism by which LLMs answer and reason through problems is different, so I simply don't think these are comparable.

But deciding the next token is not a merely mechanical process. Even if the string of tokens from our swapped out humans ends up being syntactically incorrect, it's due to the combination of intelligently selected tokens. (Presumably intelligent human programmers seem to make syntactic errors)