Voting makes absolute rational sense, what are you talking about. It's just that it makes sense in aggregate, but for that to make sense everybody must do their part.
Looking at history, one person choosing to vote is statistically useless if the goal is to influence the outcome of a presidential or congressional/senatorial election in the USA.
The chance of one vote being the difference between a tie and a win for a candidate has been approximately zero. And in the extremely rare times when there has been such a one vote difference, there have been re-counts that conclude with a margin that is larger than one vote [0][1].
Mathematically/statistically this makes intuitive sense. One might ask: what's the chance that a vote ends in a tie when there are 10, 100, 100,000... 10 million voters? As the voting pool increases, the chance decreases.
The most common objection is along the lines of, "if everyone decided not to vote because their vote didn't matter, then no one would vote!" Yep, that's correct... but that doesn't describe reality: clearly people vote a lot.
Voting because one enjoys it, gets satisfaction of some sort from it, feels that they are doing their "civic duty" and discharging a responsibility, etc... that's fine. But don't vote because you think you're gonna change the outcome.
This is like asking, "if pigs could fly, what happens?" -> all sorts of things... but pigs can't fly.
"if nobody votes..." is a hypothetical that has never been true because people DO vote. I don't know of a good reason to believe they'll stop voting. Obviously the futility of voting to change the election outcome isn't stopping them so far.
> It's just that it makes sense in aggregate, but for that to make sense everybody must do their part.
I don’t understand that. The fewer people vote, the more impact your vote has, so the more sense it makes to vote (up to a limit, of course. If too few people vote, revolution gray be around the corner)
> Voting makes absolute rational sense, what are you talking about.
Try to do an expected value analysis of your vote.
Say the difference between your candidate winning or losing is worth 1000 USD. Multiply that by the odds that your vote will cause them to win. Take that very small number and see if you'd drive 2 minutes for that or just calculate if the lead used up on the pencil is worth that.
Completely right. I think what is suprising about this wave of automation is that until now automation happened to more manual, blue collar work. I for one didn't really think that it will happen to software development up until some months ago.
They'd have to hire pentesters to run around, inserting pendrives into companies' computers.
The computers would get hacked and press releases would brag about how many crimes their models committed.
All to prove how dangerous the models are, in order to confirm high market valuation of these companies.
Hahaha good one. Profit is the whole reason of existence for for-profit companies. Sure, companies might start with some ideologic grain of thought. But as soon as you reach a certain size, all that goes flying out of the window.
I agree at the top, and it certainly trickles down to some degree. Still, a lot of the everyday engineers who actually make the stuff at every place I’ve ever been just care about making things that are good.
You're taking that phrase out of context. If you look at the parent and grandparent comments of the one you originally replied to, it's pretty clear that "the answer is profit" was pointing to the insinuation that Anthropic is deliberately causing Claude Code to waste lots of tokens for no reason other than short-term financial gain, and that's what solidasparagus was disagreeing with.
even if their motive is "make our product better", that is still just the profit motive with extra steps. the reason to make your product better is to make it more competitive so that... it makes more profit long term.
But would you argue that it is neither about short term nor long term financial gain? Cause that was my point. It really always is about profit one way or another, in my experience, with barely any exception I can think of.
I don't know. I think the moat will come from enterprise deals and deep enterprise integration, like it does for almost all software products so far.
I think for B2C products to have moat you need some type of network like social media apps. Or can you think of any other examples of B2C software products that have a strong moat?
TBH I was thinking moat in terms of enterprise customers so I think we're actually on the same page. The majority of (non-tech) companies do not want infrastructure-they want capabilities. If anthropic can drive adoption for agentic capabilities in enterprise _running on their anthropic's infra_, that can help keep anthropic customers inside their ecosystem as there would be switching costs.
For the B2C side, my gut is telling me that Anthropic couldn't care less about that market, at least for now, with their bot product.
Moats become known ex-post not ex-ante. shake my head its getting boring! Every other post seems to be a moats and most of you haven't got a faintest clue of what a durable competitive advantage is and how it actually gets created.
Personally I am someone with all the free time in the world guess what? I barely use LLMs! Im fortunate to have the ability to think critically for myself and ponder what exactly is the value-add of these tools. Look I have no doubt they provide solutions to problems at a tap of a button with some degree of variance w.r.t correctness and quality but people should take a step back and have a more nuanced thought process.
Its only the frontier labs that don't want you to do that and want to focus on 'go go go'. I'm seeing way too much frantic behaviour and people getting all caught up in it. What's panicking gonna do? Just relax and observe cautiously.
yeah moats are bad for everyone who isn't a shareholder or employee so i don't get the concern for whether or not there's a moat, its like watching shark tank
Can somebody explain like I'm five what this exactly is? How are providers like Fireworks or Novita providing inference today? Do they use some other inference engine software? If yes, what is the advantage of the DeepSeek inference engine?
For the most part each provider implemented their own inference engines. This release will help them all adopt the common set of optimisations to serve DeepSeek Flash optimally.
Well except that baseten serves deepseek faster than this already at a lower price. So this seems to mostly help startup inference providers that don't have their own inference engines.
> No company is going to pay e.g. $15/user/month for Jira when they can get the same thing for free - better even
It wouldn't be for free though, would it? People need to build and maintain it (and there's LLM cost associated with it too).
Let's say you are a 5 person start-up. It makes much more sense to pay $15/user/month for services like Jira, Slack, Email etc. then to build and maintain everything yourself.
For super large companies, it might make financial sense to build some of the tools in-house. But then again, that probably already made sense for LLMs were a thing. But there is more to it than just the pure financials (i.e. salary).
You really don't need to be that large for it to make sense. A lot of these products are very rarely updated. Jira hasn't improved at all in the last 10 years as far as I can tell.
Maybe a 5 person company wouldn't do it. A 100 person one though? No brainer. And it only takes one to open source their solution.
There are already many open-source Jira alternatives. So why are not every > 100 person company just hosting and using those for free instead of paying tens of thousands of dollars to Atlassian?
We develop a Shopify app. Sometimes, we need collaborator access to a customer's store to check for a bug or do a setup. Today, I noticed that Shopify requires me to identify via passport or ID before letting me request acceess to a customer's store.
What the hell? Why do I need to upload my ID to Shopify for this? This is already a super secure process where my customer needs to confirm my account to give access.
reply