Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | jjfoooo4's commentslogin

Curious if you agree that local is where Apple's bet is long term - it's out of reach now, but I found the jump in capability for the top line laptop interesting. Presumably chip development hasn't focused all that much on running LLM's for all that long, I'm wondering what kind of jump we'll see two or three releases down the line.

I’m really, really uninterested in reading AI content that other people have generated. If I’m on Twitter, I’m looking for what humans have to say.

I'm afraid that ship has long sailed. The humans left on Twitter are all just copy pasting AI slop now...

I've been playing with something similar! Curious how you are interfacing with Chess.com / lichess.org, are you having people paste their PGN's?


Right now I'm having people paste their PGNs - I had sync working but took it out as I'm waiting for some clarification on the API use https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/readme-1


Would be interested in collaborating! My email is in my bio

Why do you think that? Senior, staff, principle levels are pretty standard across the industry, even if some companies call them different things


This is definitely not true. It’s all dependent on the company size.

I work in cloud consulting (specialize in app dev).

I worked at AWS ProServe (full blue badge RSU earning employee) before working for a much smaller company. I’ve seen the leveling guidelines for both.

An L5 (mid level) at AWS had to be a subject matter expert in at least one area (development, DevOps, security, etc) and be able to lead a “workstream” of a larger project including dealing with a customer or a smaller project by themselves. That maps to a “Senior Architect” at my current company.

A senior (L6) at AWS should be able to handle larger projects with multiple workstreams and deal with more ambiguity. That maps to a staff at my current company (current position)

An L7 is usually over a practice and/or handling multiple large implementations and more involved with strategy. Imagine someone (who hypothetically - they don’t need outside consultants) was working with Netflix.

That maps to a “Senior Staff” at our company.

You might ask what about lower levels in consulting? I never work with them. The bilingual cloud architects/senior cloud architects work with them. We don’t hire anything lower than that in the US.


I'm guessing you've only worked at very large companies, specifically tech companies then?

I've worked at pretty much every size company imaginable.As the top post pointed out, these titles are meaningless across smaller companies. I've been at startups where nobody had titles at all, I've small companies where anyone remotely senior as a principal. I've also worked at large non-tech companies with only 3 levels for IC, after that you were expected to transition to management.

Large, tech companies have some degree they can be compared but what these titles mean from company to company is pretty meaningless.


They're somewhat standardized in Big Tech in that people have worked out how to map titles across these companies. But that accounts for a very small fraction of the total industry.


The upgrade to the native installer gave me some issues, I had Claude fail to return any responses and continuously eat memory until my computer crashed! The only fix I could figure out is nuking my entire .claude dir, losing all my history etc with it


What else does "regime change" as a goal refer to?


This scenario always imagines that the people getting bombs rained down on them will somehow determine that their actual friends in the world are those dropping the bombs.

Even accepting this, how exactly are these peaceful, western friendly civilians going to withstand a war better than their country's army?

It's very depressing to see this playbook credulously trotted out yet again. When has this worked?


> But the entire economic surplus of Europe, Asia and North America was basically dedicated to (or extracted towards) making things that were reasonably expected to be destroyed within the year.

This is no longer necessary to inflict the catastrophic destruction we're really referring to when talking about a hypothetical WWIII


Their argument is that, by definition, it can’t be a world war unless all economic surplus is dedicated to war purposes.

I tend to agree with both of you, and that by extension, we will never see another world war unless society as we know it collapses significantly.


I don't think you are using standard definitions.

> A world war is an international conflict that involves most or all of the world's major powers. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_war

> Total war is a type of warfare that mobilizes the totality of national resources to sustain war production, blurring the line between military and civilian activities and legitimate attacks on civilian targets as part of a war without restriction as to the combatants, territory or objectives involved. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_war

It does so happen that the two world wars were also total wars.


Well first off I think we were speaking colloquially. But secondly, I think unless certain powers cross some threshold where they’re undeniably engaging “total war”, they’ll use wishy-washy terms like “special military operation” (Russia) or “armed conflict”. That’s also not to mention proxy wars (Syria) or even non-violent acts of aggression against sovereignty (Hong Kong).

In other words, “total war” is a necessary ingredient for a “world war” these days or you’ll have all of these countries claiming they’re not actually at war.


Things have changed since I was a kid. We've gone from saturation bombing and dropping nukes as the big kahuna to being able to do point assassination strikes.

Topical the Israelis just killed Khamenei.


> The unix commandline tools being the most efficient way to use an LLM has been a surprise. > I wonder the reason.

Because they are really, really well designed for humans.

Everyone is trying to reinvent the wheel and create "agent interfaces", but there is fundamentally no difference between what makes a text based interface easy for a human to use and what makes it easy for an agent to use.


Tech has been trying to "gobble up" legal, medical, etc for decades. I'm quite skeptical a newcomer with a powerful model will be able to penetrate them, especially while selling those incumbents access to the same models they are building on.


> Tech has been trying to "gobble up" legal, medical, etc for decades

This time it’s different, obviously.

> especially while selling those incumbents access to the same models they are building on.

In the extreme, i think it’s plausible that frontier labs basically stop selling any access to their leading models. Whatever you make available by API will just get distilled. In the vertical integration world, the only way you get access to these models is by contracting with a company to buy a product (requirements in, code/decisions out) rather than direct conversation with the AI.

I don’t think they would unship Opus 4.6, but there isn’t a strong incentive to compete on chatbot intelligence in this world.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: