These are new products (generally) and that's a different class of problem.

It is possible that since LLM+harness helps with execution then we should see more experiments.

It is amazing that this doesn't happen more often.

GDM is making (or has been backed into a corner into making) the bet that high throughput, low latency, low capability models are the path forward.

That probably works for vibe coded apps by non-practitioners.

I suspect that practitioners/professionals will wait longer for better results.

1. 2019 capped-profit restructuring + 1B MSFT investment

2. 2023 Microsoft expansion / reported 75%-then-49% economics

3. 2024/2025 PBC restructuring

AFAIK it has not been reported as to exactly what the jury found, but IIUC the 2019 date is consistent with their findings.

That's poor for Musk, but it makes sense. He was arguing 2023. I think it is a valid argument.

But he had to know that 2019 was very much in play (and is likely the most logically consistent).

This is very squishy law.

I do not think that your second was correct.

Gemini will conduct seconds to minutes of work before requesting aid. And it will commonly fall over.

Claude/Codex will commonly do minutes to hours of work.

The difference is one to two orders of magnitude. It is immense.

He made a follow up after the pushback by GDM.

Google’s businesses are very broad and durable. But Google being the only company in the world without access (except for GDM+labs) to a competent coding agent will take a toll.

We’ll see how long Google can hold out hoping for GDM to create something that is competitive.

I’m guess that within 6 months Google will give up on coding and finally let their devs use Claude/Codex.

This isn’t a security problem, this is a GDM issue with GDM’s promises being far beyond their ability.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ykiuz1ZdGBc

That sure felt "different".

No doubt hands are important, but I think you've missed a lot here Wired.

If Grok is actually good here, they will have a customer!

Here is the LLM's summary of the current legal issue at hand:

Attempting to determine the identity of an unknown individual co-located with a victim at a specific time requires a reverse-location query. Because the Supreme Court has not yet established a unified national doctrine for these searches post-Carpenter, lower courts are highly fragmented. Many magistrates systematically refuse to authorize geofence warrants or tower dumps, citing the lack of individualized probable cause for the peripheral, innocent devices swept up in the geographic net.

And indeed, in my case, the police were not able to conduct this geofenced investigation (which would have instantly idenitied the person).

Meta pays top dollar. They also pay enormous sums for what management identifies as performance.

Conversely, Meta is ruthless about cutting those management identifies as low performers.

This is the deal going in. It’s not a crime.

This is so much better than the competition. I suspect that this will have an impact in business and education, at a minimum.

Apple Watch, AirPods, M1 Silicon, services.

A few flops, like Apple Vision Pro and their confusion with AI. But that's ok given the wins.

Overall, as a non-founder he's near the tops in CEOs over the last couple of decades. The only non-founders I would put above him are Satya (although he has a had a couple of rough years), Bob Iger, Jamie Dimon and maybe Andy Jassy.

Taking a fair lens to this he is "first round hall of fame non-founder".

I get that people are scared of investing in China. But if I still made single stock investments, I would seriously consider BABA, it seems well positioned.

Given that it makes sense to cut if the company doesn't have new product ideas to spend that excess resources.

Cynicism makes you sound smart. Optimism makes you successful.

The cynicism around this technology is everywhere, even though it clearly has real power to solve problems. It is a technology which enables so many use cases that were impossible before, that makes it very highly hyped/expected. And that is causing an immune (over) reaction by natural skeptics, that's an error.

People need to take a measured, reality based, view of how the technology is being used today, the adoption curve, and the increase in capabilities over time.

It's clearly being used strongly, and may even be revolutionary.

Bubbles burst when there's no 'there' there. AI has an undeniable 'there'—the only question is the timing of the ROI.

Practical LLMs on mobile devices are at least a few years away.

Why would anyone give him money? Really. I'm blown away.