The available API shapes have limited so much over the years. It's really hard to come up with a new one and have it used, so everyone just tries to fit their work into the existing APIs (chat/completions).
Good job to them for putting out something that does seem quite nice to use, and will likely get a bit of wider traction.
Absolutely. I write a lot of code in 2026. You've got to be able to reason about multiple abstractions, and writing is thinking. In many situations, that means getting down to the code.
Paul Graham use to say something like: You can't think well without writing well. If I interpret it well, he views writing not as a way to record thoughts, but as the actual tool used to discover and refine them.
If I understand he says this related to regular text but we could extend to writing code too.
Anyone who has learned a language knows this anecdotally. The linguistic structures need to be marshalled by active cognition (editing and writing). Merely reading and watching is not enough.
> Unfortunately, the manufacturing environment has changed dramatically. The effects of COVID, increasing manufacturing and operating costs, and significant changes in consumer purchasing habits have made it increasingly difficult for a small American manufacturer such as Sherline to maintain the workforce and production levels necessary to remain competitive.
Can’t help but wonder if “operating costs” include tariffs and other policy decisions by the current administration that have driven up costs for everyone.
It is not just tariffs. The cost of living in the US, especially housing, has approximately doubled in my area since 2019. There is a massive overinvestment in real estate. When housing costs go up it forces companies to pay their employees more to adjust which then drives up the COGS. This becomes a feedback loop because the real estate investors see the prices go up and say "well we have to raise rents because COGS are going up."
Competing with any offshore becomes impossible (especially when compared to countries which subsidize their production). Companies close instead of attempting to compete. Why would you when simply investing in real estate, crypto or AI would net more money? The parts needed to produce in the US are typically not made in the US.
Tariffs hurt...a lot...the companies I work with directly (including mine) have been struggling with them for a decade now. But it is a lot more than that...there is a general lack of interest in making things that are real. Plus, the cost if you attempt to do so puts you in a position where you cannot be competitive.
+1 on the tarrifs and the cost of living. We actually left the USA and moved to the Caribbean because our R&D was being burned up in tarrifs; actually cheaper to move the operation. It’s stupid to raise tarrifs overnight when there are no comparable domestic alternatives. A 5 year, stable plan to ramp tariffs? Sure. That builds a runway for local supply and transition. Random tariff adjustment between 0-200% changing every month? Absolute poison for innovation, and local suppliers can’t ramp on chaos.
The cost of living, also, needs a reframe. The real truth there is that most people, who live paycheck to paycheck, are half as prosperous as they were a couple of years ago. Think about that. The Majority of an entire country became twice as poor practically overnight. It’s not cost of living rising , it’s standard of living being halved for most Americans. It’s not a small thing, and it will have reprocussions for decades. A population on strong retrograde prosperity does not innovate, does not invent, does not plan for the future. It’s basically terminal cancer.
No doubt innovation will rise once the ashes cool, but that’s more like what we are seeing in Eastern Europe, admirable and significant, but no equivalence whatsoever to the economic juggernaut that the USA once was. (And still is, for now)
Maybe automation will turn that around, but who then is the beneficiary of a fleet of millions (billions?) of corporate owned general purpose humanoid robots? That’s a big part of what my startup is working on ; making that phase generally useful to regular people, not just corporate giants.
Something in this is contradictory and just hoping for a clarification - over investment in real estate should drop costs. I assume you mean under investment leading to prices requiring an overly burdensome amount of personal investment in housing?
I think a more clear statement would be collusion/manipulation in the rental market. Both commercial and residential.
In my town there is a constant raising of rent. People moving away, tons of new overpriced apartments largely vacant. Huge number of short term rentals. Affordable houses are torn down to make condos which are owned by people who don't live there (vacant most of the year, held as investment).
So many vacant commercial units with prices that don't match what businesses can afford to pay...but it drives up the rest of the rental prices to people going "site unseen". If you were not from here you would assume there is a huge demand for those buildings at that rate...this is not true.
These investors are not planning on using these units to help the housing crisis...and they have the ability to "stay irrational longer than renters can stay solvent". Overall this will come back to bite them...but in the short term they can reap the rewards.
Some commercial loans allow "interest only payments" if the unit is vacant. This allows investors to buy several locations...keep half vacant at higher prices and drive up the rents in the area. Through collusion and catering to out of area investors (who don't know better) they can hold the properties for a few years and double their money without every renting the building or paying on the principal of their loan.
This is what I mean by "overinvestment". Locally...why would you invest in a company (US or not) when you can just call dibs on essential services and rake in cash.
My county last I checked was over 35% retired. Most of those who I speak with moved here from out of state and bought multiple houses with the goal of renting them out to pay for their retirement...but when COGS go up that means rent needs to also to support the lifestyle they are accustomed to. Renters are expected to "quit buying coffees" so they can pay the rent...but nobody seems to ask the real estate investor to take personal responsibility for their part in the problem.
I know people say more investment in real estate drives prices down...but that is not the case. Nobody here is building housing to make it cheaper...they are building it because they heard they can get more money than last year. "If they build a new building it should be worth more than an old one right?" So prices keep climbing. Average renter here makes $30-40k (last I checked) but to live in a way that allows you to save you need to make $70k/year.
There is no housing shortage (in my area). There is an "affordable housing" shortage...and that will not be solved by building more unless there are major changes made to the way commercial loans (or personal ethics) are handled.
The only hope is people learn to practice ethical capitalism.
I think you’re touching on a lot of things here which form a self reinforcing web
A) pensions don’t exist so people need cashflow to retire. You either save enough capital that you can build an annuity for yourself or you have cash flow investments and the lowest effort one is rental properties.
B) taxes for capital gains on a home that’s appreciated enough incentive rolling your home into a rental then rolling it into more rentals as it appreciates further afield into lower cost areas. The basis isn’t taxable as long as you roll it to another investment, and as prices go up, you are incentivized to move it into more properties to diversify at lower rents but more units. As that effect continues as people retire the cost of rentals further from the city core keeps rising. An easy fix would be to raise the capital gains deduction for a primary residence to incentive retirees to outright sell and take the annuity option, which is actually easier overall but the capital gains tax makes it unattractive today.
C) Obviously the financing your described, but compounded by private equity and hedge fund dominance in the unit and development rental market skewing towards higher margin lower occupancy developments. The marginal cost of a mass produced “luxury” rental allows for a lot of vacancy, compounded by the IO and other benefits to reduce vacancy load costs. There are also tax benefits to vacancy that improve as your portfolio gets larger. I think this is more than the retiree effect honestly, I think funds dominate large developments now and increasingly unit level portfolios.
D) The rezoning effect is IMO making it worse because it’s making the optionality of low density developments greater allowing for land value appreciation that wouldn’t happen otherwise because of (C). It’s taking a property with lower utility and making it more valuable for a larger development, but there’s no incentive to make the development more affordable per unit. Instead it increases the price per square foot of property value, increasing costs for everyone, while marginally increasing units but they’re constructed and priced to keep price per square foot of livable areas equal or increasing.
I think (A) can’t improve without a real social security system that replaces pensions. (B) can’t improve without tax reform realizing the nominal cutoffs don’t account for inflation and aren’t “rich” taxes any more but retiree taxes. (C) is probably intractable without socialist regulations which are perceived as unfair, and are hard to craft in a way that is not in fact unfair or have unintended consequences (D) is hard because it’s actually a demonstration of the unintended consequences of regulation and ethical capitalism - but the effect is paradoxical.
These are all structurally hard problems and they aren’t made better by the rate of global population growth. There are way more people today than there were before, and economic activity is much denser than before. The urban areas are crushed, and the rural areas empty except for a hoary crust of MAGA with disproportionate state and federal power. It is frustrating all over - and I don’t see an end state that is very positive.
> A) pensions don’t exist so people need cashflow to retire. You either save enough capital that you can build an annuity for yourself or you have cash flow investments and the lowest effort one is rental properties.
First, I assume that we are talking about the United States here.
"pensions don’t exist": This is certainly untrue, especially for retired people today. Private pensions only started to disappear enmass in the late 1990s. Public pension certainly exists. It is called Social Security, and it pays about 25K USD (on average) per year, per retired person.
"so people need cashflow to retire": Sure, they can do that with a 401k that holds bonds. For those unaware, 401k plans really took off in the 1980s. Retired people today most likely have one, plus their 401k was growing during an incredible time. From 1985 to 2015, the S&P 500 grew 12+% per year. That is crazy compounded results!
"you have cash flow investments and the lowest effort one is rental properties": I don't know where this myth started of "rental properties are low effort", but it needs to die. It is much more work that managing a 401k. Also, the ROI for rental properties is rarely more than 5%. Frequently, lower. So, the 401k looks much better and more consistent. Sometimes rental properties are vacant for months at a time. Then you have negative yield/carry because you still have expenses.
Bond yields aren’t comparable to property cash flow; especially leveraged property. Additionally they are highly susceptible to rates and capital risks. It’s also technically a lot harder for most people to juggle a 401k annuity structure. I did however discuss structuring your own annuity earlier. Bonds are much lower than 5% typically for anything other than the worst credit possible. For better than 5% you need to be a relatively active trader, and manage the cash disposition well. Owning property is typically less risk and less effort for the average person, and most they can offload to a property manager. They can of course hire a financial advisor.
Most people having had a rental at some point understand the concepts a lot better than bond trading and investing writ large. They also can’t convert their basis in their home appreciation into their 401k, and my point was on basis rolling of property capital gains and how to convert your family home appreciation into a tax deferred vehicle with cashflow.
Personally, I agree with you; I would do a self managed annuity structure and hire an advisor for my later life when I may not be able to manage it. However, I’m just explaining the typical thinking. And the capital appreciation basis roll is a real problem for retirees whose home appreciated over their lives.
I think you misunderstand what happened in the 80’s - pensions were raided and they were stolen. In the 90’s the defense was to not offer them any more. There do exist some pensions, mostly governmental, and some rare corporate pensions that escaped raiding, but the survival of private pensions wasn’t great even for those that had them. Social security is below poverty rates, and is not a retirement plan but supplemental. It was designed with the private pension system existing in mind. I’m fine with expanding social security by lifting income caps and other fixes, including a sovereign wealth fund. The status quo isn’t tenable.
> Bond yields aren’t comparable to property cash flow; especially leveraged property.
You are right: Bond coupon and principal payments always pay on time for highly rated bonds (incl. gov't bonds). However, the investment property does not pay when it is vacant. "[L]everaged property" implies there is a backing loan. How do you pay the loan if the property is vacant? Suddenly, that investment property doesn't look so great.
> I think you misunderstand what happened in the 80’s - pensions were raided and they were stolen.
This is the reason why Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) exists. It provides insurance for pensions that went bankrupt via the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. Also, the term "stolen" is doing some very heavy living here: "pensions were raided and they were stolen". In truth, most of these pensions were overfunded, and it was legal for companies to terminate the private pension, then replace it with an annuity that would guarantee promised payments to pensioners.
The 401k with company matching has largely replaced (or: overtaken) the private pension in the United States. The primary problem with putting so much pressure on the 401k system: There are lots of people who don't have/use professional advice how to manage their savings. My mother was well-educated (master's degree) and was a public school teacher for 35+ years. She was not well-equipped to manage her 401k. She only understood the basics. Think about that: She has two university degrees. Think of all the people who have much less and are required to manage their primary source of retirement income. It is a flawed system.
Personally, I much prefer the Dutch or Japanese "Three Pillar" system: (1) National minimum pension (like US Social Security), (2) private pension provided by workplace (professionally managed), (3) personal pension(s) (similar to 401k). In combination, the trio provides the greatest chance for people to avoid poverty during retirement.
More people have a 401k today than ever had a private pension. While a pension does have advantages (and not everybody has a useful amount in their 401k), your odds of having a good retirement plan are higher today than ever.
That still leaves a lot of people with a terrible retirement plan though. SS is something, but that is about all you can say about it.
Come - the median retirement age 401k balance is $97k. This isn’t useful, and most people get a 401k default enrollment without contributions so account existence isn’t a useful metric. Your odds aren’t better if you don’t contribute.
I’d also note you have to be at a company that even offers a 401k. Only 45% of Americans have access to a 401k, or have their own IRA. This isn’t a safety net - I’d like to see you do a high wire with only 45% of the area of your walk covered with a net, and of that the median segment doesn’t have the strength to hold your weight. It’s a political gambit to fool people into voting against their best interests.
You miss one other point - when pensions where common they were not backed by guarantees. I had some [distant relative] who worked for a company with a pension for many years, just before he was ready to retire the company went bankrupt - the company pension was invested in company stock which meant the pension was also bankrupt. A few other incidences like this and the US government started backing pensions - but they also put in strict rules that made them a poor investment in general. A 401k is better because you can get good investments while also getting enough diversity for investments.
Your points seem to be valid. I don't have a solution either.
Where I live used to be the rural area that people made fun of you for being from (Idaho). Also, my county is 70%+ MAGA voters. So I understand your point about disproportionate amount of power...that is another topic entirely (as is the Redoubt movement and other things attempting to profit off the imbalance).
This is happening everywhere around me. Montana is just as bad. Locals have nowhere to go and cannot afford to stay.
I don't have a solution...just pointing out my observations of the issues I have encountered personally.
Is it really “research” - as in expanding human knowledge - if nobody understands it? The point is deepening human understanding, not producing research papers
It doesn’t matter if it’s code, writing, or military decisions. People can / should be held accountable. As soon as people choose to remove their own accountability, that’s when the bad stuff happens. Whether it’s slop code or innocent civilians killed in a missile strike
New take on an old adage: "A computer can not be held responsible. Therefore a computer should always be used to make management decisions so that we can cover our asses."
It seems that a pretty clear first step is that thinking traces are required, along with sourcing all evidence, so that things can be easily double checked. Anthropic/OpenAI have business reasons for not sharing those, but it also probably means they can't be trusted with any vital decision making.
People will not be held responsible; the disasters caused by AI will be attributed as a natural phenomenon -- like the weather. The companies involved in creating and operating AI will certainly not take any accountability for any "spills".
I don't know how you can confidently say that without first knowing who the victims are. If AI causes a disaster that harms a member of the American billionaire class, someone will need to satisfy their bloodlust.
I'm excited for AI executives declaring private military action against each other.
Really there are two levels of AI capabilities here. One that we already have and is causing tons of problems, and a theoretical one that is very likely to exist soon.
If we are lucky AI will attack some billionaire like you say and people will be held liable.
If we are not lucky people will not be held liable and labs and the military will keep pushing the limits until a sovereign AI gets loose and then have a fucking mess where AI takes itself out of the human control loop.
My prediction is the "theorhetical one" and quantum computing breakthroughs are currently heavily gated U.S. Pentagon projects and will be weaponized for global domination for the U.S. Deep State Monarchy.
If you had no regard for the U.S. Constitution, how would you use the "theorhetical one" paired with State voter rolls, the federal postal system, and "one big beautiful dataset" of private American data to influence the next public election?
Any action you take will be approved due to sycophants you apppointed, bribed, or campaigned for, and then contested in court long after you leave office / the country / existence. So don't let that be a deterrent.
This is absolutely the case. Sometime the person responsible will be the person using the AI, sometimes the people responsible will be the people who created that AI, but actual humans must always be accountable when AI is used to cause harm
Doing a bit of research, this applies to what’s considered a “manual search” as in a CBP agent spending time manually looking at your phone. It does not appear to allow (or speak to?) plugging your phone into forensic tools for a deeper inspection.
Not great, but I think that’s what’s being specifically adjudicated here.
They still cannot deny an US citizen entry if you decline to unlock your phone, though they may confiscate your device. I don’t know if they would then be allowed to do deeper forensics without a warrant.
It’s not about what the AI can do, it’s about your ability as a human to keep up with the details so you can make effective decisions. You the human are ultimately responsible.
Because where dangers lie is when you lose track of that one tiny important thing that turns out to really really matter.
As far as the legal system is concerned, an employee operating an LLM is no different than an employee operating heavy construction equipment. The employer is liable for maintaining the equipment, ensuring employees are sufficiently qualified to operate the equipment, and continuously following policies and procedures to avoid harm when operating the machine. Merely instructing employees they're responsible for using the machine safely as determined by their own judgement isn't legally defensible.
That said, your employer might be stupid and fire you anyways. So if that happens, you'll should talk to a lawyer and bring your employer court for wrongful termination. It will take time, but you'll almost certainly get a very nice settlement payout. There's only downside risk for a company to be a involved with a novel legal dispute, and they'll pay handsomely to avoid it.
reply