Could it be possible, these firms are optimizing for two things: a) Better performance. b) Gathering data from you to further improve performance later. I've also found the huge amount of planning rather than iteration frustrating. I've felt like I'm teaching a junior!

I think they simply optimize around E2E benchmarks, none of those benchmarks is designed as multi turn assistance to the user, but going from a prompt straight to the final solution.

Exactly. How can "we" develop and encourage benchmarks for multi-turn user assistance? That is what I want. I feel like the models and harnesses push much too hard against this workflow -- that they push you towards letting go and vibe coding, with only your discipline (and desire for a quality and maintainable product) holding it back.

more thinking == more tokens === more money LOLL

Os there a cost benchmark out there? I wonder how frontier models are doing over time for cost per problem solved.

I think they are optimizing for one-shot performance because that will drive usage. They can’t afford to look bad in the benchmarks. And if that means consuming an order of magnitude more tokens, well, that’s good for business, too.

AI crawls your post, corrupts your idea or alters it to advertise a product and then passes that along. Still happy?

I built a passion reference site. A large part of that passion came from knowing and talking to the people I was helping. One person emailing or saying thanks would later help power me through to create more useful articles. Enriching openai/claude/ms/google and no thanks from an individual, has disincentivized me from writing more.

Same here. People knew the website and it was immensely flattering to meet users in the wild. It motivated me to really sweat the small stuff, because people noticed. Now I'm just feeding the slop machine, and it feels pointless.

Can you expand how it redefined computing for you personally?

Is it about the users or the data the users generate. Pretty easy to see the day devs are replaced by the data they themselves generated. Companies are only going to get one chance to grad this data. Similar to the internet cutoff.

True, especially with Composer (the finetuned model by cursor)

I would guess he's looking to compare the equivalent of fast-food to fine-dining or nutritious eating.

Yeah, I meant 'content' in terms of the intrinsic value, the 'nutritional value' underlying the writing... The message, the story, the information content.

Actually it's kind of dystopian to think of it; that the word 'content' has been appropriated to refer to an arbitrarily broad range of media products...

The word 'content' used to be associated with the word 'substance' but in a modern context, it's actually more closely associated with the concept of 'form' as the word emphasizes a variety of media... What happened to the term "multimedia"? IMO this is what I would refer to when some people say content... I mean, there's no content in content... It's empty, it's all smoke and mirrors.

This is a good point. I did indeed default into "content = media" whereas yes in fact "content" used to mean the meat, the substance.

Thanks for replying, made me think about it.

Very correct! Why internal dashboards keep getting rebuild: https://www.timestored.com/pulse/why-internal-dashboards-get... It took me a few years to home in on the exact idea you've captured and I work in this exact area. There's a middle layer between UI team and notebook experiments that isn't worth companies building themselves.

The article is ignorant of reality. "The typical under-13 social media user is not a sneaky kid. It’s a family making a decision together. " No, every other kid had it and the parent had no choice else their child would be ostracised. Their example of kids learning about volcanoes in youtube. Ha! Go look at the view number for mindless nonsense... Minecraft blabbering then find me a volcano with more child views.

I wouldn’t mind YouTube if my kids asked to watch videos of volcanoes. Instead they always end up trying to watch the most annoying people possible playing video games for a few minutes before we ask them to switch it off.

If YouTube really cared about kids they should allow users to pick a subset of channels and never ever mention again anything else. Alas, we all know this will never happen because YouTube doesn’t care about what people watch as long as they come back watching some more

Yes, the ability to command a kingdom was relative to the number of people with force you could convince AND pay to be on your side vs the others. With automation, drones and AI, you no longer need any convincing just capital.

The term is Institutional knowledge. "An organization's collective memory, encompassing the unique expertise, experiences, processes, and cultural insights built over time by its members, acting as a vital asset that guides operations, decision-making, and continuity, often residing in seasoned employees' tacit understanding but also in documented procedures and data. It includes deep technical skills..."

Institutional knowledge is scoped to members of an organization and covers things related specifically to the institution's operations. What I'm talking about is the knowledge of the general population, often as it relates to an institution's products.

For instance, tons of people know how to use Adobe products like Photoshop, by way of deliberate inaction on the part of Adobe around product piracy outside of workplaces. With this large knowledge pool entering into the workforce, users were able to convince workplaces to adopt Adobe products that they were already familiar with.

That wouldn't be institutional knowledge, but a pool of knowledge that institutions could take actions (or inaction, as the case above) to influence.