My MacBook Pro runs local models better than anything else in the house and I have not yet needed to install a small nuclear reactor to run it, so, I feel like they're doing fine.
This is not something that can be won. The LLM architecture has been reaching it's limitations slowly but surely. New foundational models are now being tweaked for user engagement rather than productive output.
Why do we look at these as a race? There is nothing to win. Nobody won space, or nukes, and they won’t win AI. You might get there first, but your competitor will get there soon after regardless. Embrace it.
We’re a technical crowd here, we understand inflation, and we can do math. I suspect most of us here are in a position to change the world, make things better, healthier, safer, faster. It is difficult for me to empathize with “I just can’t out of principle” when the change is so minimal. How can we ever fix big problems if people can’t adapt to such small ones? She didn’t have to deal with inflation for the last 30 years, now she is having to deal with some. To me, the bigger change would be for people to have to go without her cookies! I hope those of us growing up in this faster changing world can remember in our later years that change is necessary.
You are touching on a critical point that I have been amused by at times in these types of conversations; people are hating on AI for doing all the things that people have done and still do.
Poor planning, check. No/inadequate documentation, check. Sloppy and janky code, check. Poor practices and methods, check. Poor and miscommunication, check. Poor technical choices, check. What am I missing?
Maybe this is just a matter of some of the top tier 100x devs and teams clutching pearls in disgust at having to look at what goes on below Mt Olympus, but this is also not any different to how code quality cratered and is still really poor due to all the outsourcing and H-1B (sorry, all you H-1B hopefuls) insourcing of quantity over quality.
I say that without any judgement, but reality simply is that this issue has long been a quantity over quality argument even before AI, and mostly for non-dev reasons as the recent de-qualification of R&D funding revealed and had a marked impact on dev jobs because the C-suite could don't use R&D funding for financial shenanigans.
If people want to hate AI, go ahead. People hated and hate on the H-1B abuses and they hate on AI now. I would hope that we can just move beyond griping and mean-girling AI, and get to a point where proper practices and methods are developed to maybe make the outcomes and outputs better.
Because again, AI is not going anywhere less than even H-1B and I am sure the C-suite will find some new way to abuse and play financial shenanigans, but it's simply not going away and we need to learn to live with it since it will seemingly only get "better" and faster as it changes at breakneck speeds.
Funny that you say that, I just discovered this phone service called Cape - https://www.cape.co/
It was co-founded by John Doyle who led Palantir’s national security business before starting this company. I think this comment best describes why Cape was started in the first place:
"Cape is not disclosing valuation, but it’s notable that the funding is coming at a time when startups building military, defense, and security services are getting increased focus and priority at a time when geopolitics are shifting.
While many of those shifts are playing out at a much higher level involving wars, espionage against officers and officials, and major contacts between outsized industrial entities, Cape’s products and its growth are one of the rare examples of how some of that evolution is playing out at a consumer level"
Hi -- I'm Head of Product at Cape (previously led product at DuckDuckGo). We are indeed trying to provide an alternative to all the data collection and sharing major carriers do in the US. Happy to answer any questions people have about Cape.
This was a mind shift for me, inflation applies to stock prices too. The US cannot cut spending enough to prevent the debt death spiral. Inflation and growth are the only options. Everyone wants growth but it's hard to get, nobody wants inflation, but it's easy to get. Inflation is here to stay.
Well sure it is, we aim for some inflation on purpose.
If you mean inflation above 2% is here to stay, maybe, but 2% was an arbitrary target anyway. It doesn't make much difference whether it's around 2% or hovering between 2% and 3%.
If you think it's going to go much higher I'd like to hear why.
3% is 50% more than 2%, so it's nowhere near being within 1% of the target. I'm not trying to be pedantic, but there is an enormous difference between 1% and 50%.
It has to go higher. It’s the only way out of the debt issue. Economic growth isn’t enough given the continued spending. If the inflation can happen alongside growth it is easier to sell.
> US cannot cut spending enough to prevent the debt death spiral. Inflation and growth are the only options
Inflation, growth and defaults.
Trump has already de facto seized, and the Republicans in the Congress ceded, the power of the purse. Do you really think impounding interest payments is beyond the pale of possibility?
A balanced budget is a popular idea in theory, but very few people actually want to see it happen once they find out what their own cost will be. The politicians are going to do whatever it takes to mollify voters and keep their jobs.
I'm the past, Congress was able to prevent impoundments. Given the cult like nature of the current majority, the current situation is not "both sides".
Faster horse situation. I'd take one that was slightly larger that could plug into a monitor and replace my desktop/laptop. But then that would be 1 or 2 less devices I would buy.
I don't understand the Air model. It's cool, but just a different price point. The thickness of a device means nothing to me anymore, they're all close enough.
