> Surely Congress or the courts would have something to say about it?
my sense is that Trump feels to be above the law right now, having ordered the operation to seize Maduro without Congressional approval (illegal under U.S. constitutional law). Trump's reasoning was that "Congress has a tendency to leak", and so to him congress seems little more than background noise.
I switched to Firefox after Chrome stopped supporting uBlock Origin, for all the slights I've seen on HN lately with the direction of the product I've been very happy. No regrets.
1) helping to saturate traditional SaaS because code is being commoditized / the effort to build is dropping significantly.
2) defining an adjacent sub-category of SaaS: "Service-as-a-Software" where the SaaS provides _outcomes_ instead of _tools_; this couldn't really exist at scale before recently.
I recall in the first lecture of some Comp Sci class back at uni, our lecturer had learnt what felt like every student's name and face from their digital profile, some 100 people. Whenever a random student raised their hand to participate he would say say "yes, <first name>". I'm still to this day in awe of that.
I had period where I obsessively read too much about those cases. That was pattern I have seen. The first media usually contained such speculation, the later reports did not really confirmed it. What those contained were stories of other kids being attacked by them or afraid of them.
Show me three whose lives show them being bullying victims striking back. Go to read a biography of pretty much any popular one and you find raising levels of aggression toward people around. I have yet to see a ONE that would be a bullying victim lashing back.
Really, show me some that were primary bullying victims string back.
Adam Lanza and Elliot Rogers had both mental health issues and family that allowed them to isolate themselves. Adam Lanza mom was reported to be afraid of him before the end and basically in abusive relationship with him (where he was the abusers) before being killed. In case of Nikolas Jacob Cruz, you see volatile boy threatening and attacking others including a girl that school assigned to tutor him. She stopped because he was bullying her. He WAS ostracized and lonely as a results ... but that is the kids avoiding the bully who mistreats them rather then him anything else. He had host of mental health problems for sure too.
Upvotes are a lagging indicator. Despite all the leaderboard scores presented, etc, no one actually knows how good a model is until they go use it for a while. When Claude 4 got ~2k upvotes, it was because everyone realized that Claude 3.7 was such a good model in practice - it had little to do with the actual performance of 4.
Because the benchmarks are likely gamed. Also Grok had an extremely negative news cycle right before this, so the average bloke is skeptical that the smartest AI in the world thinks the last name Steinberg means someone is a shadowy, evil, cabal-type figure. Even though they aren't totally related, most people aren't deep enough in the weeds to know this
Its a shame this model is performing so well because I can't in good conscience pay money to Elon Musk. Will just have to wait for the other labs to do their thing.
I think it's a shame that your emotions are so much in your way. It's an illusion to think you can assess Elon at his true worth, like AI hallucinating due to lack of context.
I'm not sure there's any benchmark score that'd make me use a model that suddenly starts talking about racist conspiracy theories unprompted. Doubly so for anything intended for production use.
Impartial benchmarks are great, unless (1) you have so many to choose from that you can game them (which is still true even if the benchmark makers themselves are absolutely beyond reproach), or (2) there's a difference between what you're testing and what you care about.
Goodhart's Law means 2 is approximately always true.
As it happens, we also have a lot of AI benchmarks to choose from.
Unfortunately this means every model basically has a vibe score right now, as the real independent tests are rapidly saturated into the "ooh shiny" region of the graph. Even the people working on e.g. the ARC-AGI benchmark don't think their own test is the last word.
Maligning any alternative viewpoints to yours as just some indoctrinated people following “marching orders”, rather than addressing the substance of their critique, constitutes a “poisoning the well” fallacy.
HN seems to be full of Anthropic fanboys for some reason. Probably because Dario is the only big boss in AI right now that successfully pulls off the I'm not a sociopath act.
Probably more like Claude was slightly better than GPT-xx when the IDE integrations first got widely adopted (and this was also the time where there was another scandal about Altman/OpenAI on the front page of HN every other week) so most programmers preferred Claude, then it got into a virtuous cycle where Claude got the most coding-related user queries and became the better coding model among SOTA models, which resulted in the current situation today.
reply