Actually, the article makes it pretty clear that they fund some of the really bad stuff.

That's exactly what asking an LLM means, except admitting you don't know something is respectful. If you think someone should know something that they don't, then that's a totally separate issue between you and them (and/or their manager).

> It can't possibly be better than getting a response from someone who lifted a finger to help find an answer for you.

Someone lifting a finger for their colleague, when working with them is literally their job? Wow, what a sacrifice, like sending a link to lmgtfy. So helpful! Will the result actually be an "answer", or just hallucinated AI slop? Who cares!

Unless you're saying claude is more trustworthy than your colleagues?

Your example reveals a common organization smell: work not going through the normal process for prioritization and planning. If you've done that, and the work is deprioritized, that's because the company has decided that your thing isn't as important for engineering to do. Get over it and be patient, or ask a mentor for help selling the business on the value of your thing. Creating a PR bypasses that process and burdens engineering with more work (having to understand and rework slop) than if engineering had coded the thing to begin with.

tl;dr: if a company is internally strategically unaligned, organizational dysfunction is bound to follow

if a service runs TLS 1.2, and a client runs TLS 1.2, and they can talk to each other right now, why change the language?

if you released a thing, and people are choosing not to use it, is the right move really to enshittify their current choice to force them off it?

I'll say, you should see the hours I have to work sometimes. Honestly I've rarely seen IT jobs pay OT.

In this example, the passengers are still waiting while moving (the wait for luggage is 20 minutes either way), they just don't perceive that portion of the waiting as intolerable.

Bringing it home to elevators, the situation is pretty much the same, only in reverse: someone who waits 2 minutes for an elevator and 1 more once aboard it to get to their floor, likely perceives their 3 minute total wait as less tolerable, than if they waited 1 minutes for the elevator plus another 2 once aboard.

I have to assume this is a cultural difference and you just don't have those indicators where you live, rather than "slightly moving my eyes is too hard, better make my problem into somebody else's problem"

if I remember correctly, the plot point wasn't a "civilization level reaction" to bad particle physics experiment results, but rather a very narrow reaction by less than 1/10,000,000th of civilization.

which makes sense: the vast majority of the members of "civilization" could not even accurately define "particle physics", much less understand the field, much less comprehend experimental results, much less understand the correctness of them, much less experience anguish over their correctness.

Higher compute density means higher thermal density, which means more powerful cooling is needed.

Server cooling solutions follow a management triple constraint: cheap, effective, quiet, pick up to 2.

Because loudness does not incur additional costs (due to negative externalities), "quiet" is the point of the triangle which gets most often sacrificed.

Maybe the regulations could be structured around a scaled integral of volume over time

clearly openai wants some of that FUD money that anthropic got