I've read it since 1995 and I vividly remember them enthusiastically stanning Bjorn Lomborg's denialism. That's when I learned that the Economist is actually the world's first manifestation of a phenomenon now associated with ChatGPT: immaculately-phrased ideological assertions that are presented as common sense that all good, clever, right-thinking people already know.
Like ChatGPT, the findings are delivered with polish and confidence, and like ChatGPT, you would not like what's in the sausage, were you to understand its provenance.
It's devastatingly effective on a certain kind of man.
Yes! This is something I've been thinking about quite a bit the past few weeks. We are going in this direction at work and I think graph storage is a natural way to think about this.
For my own edification, what is the goal of SPARQL compared to normal SQL or if you live in predicate-land, Prolog or Datalog?
The semantic web tools never seemed to have their breakout moment and seem to run in parallel to "mainstream" history of relational and logic programming, but I've never really understood why.
I started thinking more deeply about how I would actually do this today and it won't be as straight forward as I initially thought. Will keep it on the radar and see if I can figure out a clean way to implement. Great suggestions!
It seems wrong that Amazon should get in trouble for this when it was XAI that began this new race to the bottom.
Peoplecheered xAI on and admired how quickly they were able to move, without much regard to the methods or legality. IMO competitors had no choice but to respond in kind when they see XAI not just getting away with it, but also getting a pass on legal issues.
> It seems wrong that Amazon should get in trouble for this when it was XAI that began this new race to the bottom.
Who gives a shit who started it? The ones who continue engaging in it, should clearly be punished as they're working against humanity's best interest of keeping this planet survivable.
If you're one of the largest companies in the world, constantly brag about how environmental friendly you are and how much you care about "sustainability" or what the trendy word is today, and you end up building a data center that sets a record in pollution (either directly or indirectly), you're doing something massively fucked up and are misaligned with the rest of the people on this planet.
> Peoplecheered xAI on and admired how quickly they were able to move, without much regard to the methods or legality. IMO competitors had no choice but to respond in kind when they see XAI not just getting away with it, but also getting a pass on legal issues.
I guess this is what late-stage capitalism gives you ultimately, companies who feel like it's fine doing whatever because competitors are also doing whatever. No one I know have been cheering for anything like that, I suggest if you have people cheering about stuff like that near you, get far away.
I was with you until there. Qwen and the OpenAI models are great, aggressive agents, but they’re not as good as the anthropic models for human interaction. They just don’t have the subtlety, understanding, or attention to detail.
Claude 4.5/4.6 - absolutely agree. Fable 5? From my (limited) testing, also reasonable to interact with.
Opus 4.7/4.8/5? Absolutely smug and antagonistic and preachy. I'm constantly fighting with it to stop fighting me and accept that I occasionally know better. It's really frustrating to spend so many tokens of such an expensive model arguing with it.
yeah, it's honestly amazing just how badly anthropic managed to screw up something in claude after 4.6. its night and day, and every time I see claude doing something stupid, i instantly realize I was accidentally on Opus 5
Really? I've heard so many other people complain about this recently. And maybe it's possible that it's the prompt style even. But interesting that it's not across the board.
Pretty much! It's not dynamic memory hotplug or resizing, just dynamic billing. Usage is based on the actual RSS used by the app so you can think of the VM's defined size as just a limit, for both CPU and RAM. This means you don't have to spend time profiling and right-sizing instances to optimize costs, just make your application fast and efficient and don't worry about it!
The minimum fix would be to read it once per user turn, rather than once per tool call turn. As it is, if you tell an agent to update the file and it decides to do multiple edits on separate turns, you take a full cache miss per edit. If you're waiting 5-10 minutes on each miss (deep into a window, which is when you'd usually want to update notes) then you notice the difference.
The post is pretty explicit about it happening on every SSE turn, but I realise if I write something that is (to put it mildly) a rant, then I shouldn't expect people to read it charitably.
I also wouldn't mind being prompted before invalidating so I can decide whether to keep my cache, like most editors will prompt you if a file is edited externally.
Um, the 'codex world' is the OpenAI world and there is a ton of drama and product confusion there!
Anthropic has certainly had some drama inflicted on them by the US administration, but otherwise they have just had heads down and executed with great focus. That is why they have succeeded.
This looks great, but let's see if I have this right ...
The "Agent Apps" (or whatever we are calling them) from the big vendors are organized around projects/folders, and we attach apps (via plugins) to the projects.
This appears to mae the apps (work surfaces) the primary artifact?
Surfaces are the primary artifact for collaborating with the assistant - each one attaches an app to a workflow and gives both you and the agent a structured place to work, instead of everything flowing through chat.
Chat is still first class, and projects/folders exist separately to organize work around it.
I don’t know the specifics of this case, but in Canada, calls like this (all wrapped up in the flag), usually come from Canadian companies hoping for some sort of sole sourced contract that they have no business getting.
So so perhaps we should be excluding American companies at this time, but in the name of competition and openness, we should allow bids from our real allies, such as the Europeans or the Asians.
"America or not" is a red herring. Palantir is the specific problem.
The kind of people running these companies don't have true allegiance to anything but their own objectives. If necessary, they'd move all operations to Europe or East Asia in a month, and you'd have "Palantir 2" under a different name with no better ethics or privacy.
Increased emphasis has to be on running things domestically with on-premises hardware. As long as the vendor is elsewhere and not subject to oversight, the risks remain.
China is the most sensible current superpower. They are barely communist at all since Deng and have a better recent track record in terms of maintaining global trade. And at least in recent years they are probably the least worst super power in terms of imprisoning minorities.
The recent real war crimes of the US-Israeli entity are only comparable to the fake war crimes they conveniently accuse their opponents of while carrying out the real war crimes.
For example, it's okay to butcher 160 Iranian school girls because Iran just butchered 100,000 innocent protestors in a single day (trust me bro).
They are no longer communist. Its state controlled capitalism with a tendency to personality cult, racism, and the destruction of minorities and the systematic destruction of minority cultures.
reply