I have a good friend who is a VP at a telecom company who has never written a line of code. He's been using Claude to create interactive web pages to help him understand parts of the company.

He was so excited when he got something to work he called me immediately.

I'm sure the code isn't what you or I would write, but it is good enough for my friend. That said, heaven help him if he loses access to Claude. ;-)

I'm currently working on a robotics project that uses Nvidia's GR00T N1 model, and I was able to understand the research paper. [0]

[0]: https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.14734

A vanilla self-attention layer is just a set of token vectors. Without positional info, swapping two identical embeddings changes very little about what attention can compute. We can "fix" this problem by using positional encodings. Text that has meaning isn't just a set of characters; the location and order of those characters is what provides meaning.

https://www.amazon.com/Build-Large-Language-Model-Scratch/dp...

https://www.amazon.com/Build-DeepSeek-Scratch-Abhijit-Dandek...

I don't think there is anything in a transformer I couldn't explain in the smallest detail now.

[0]: https://www.amazon.com/Build-Large-Language-Model-Scratch/dp...

[1]: https://www.amazon.com/Build-DeepSeek-Scratch-Abhijit-Dandek...

My question is, what happens to the people who use RTX cards for gaming? This new solution isn't meant for that. Do they need an "AI accelerator" and a gaming-centric GPU?

> "Our goal is to deliver unmetered intelligence to every home and every desk with Windows," said Satya Nadella, chairman and head of Microsoft.

Then:

> However, Ian Fogg, Research Director at industry analyst firm FDM CCS Insight said the change was "likely to come with a significant price tag" and Nvidia would be targeting "those looking for workstation-class performance".

So... not every desk with Windows.

My point is that with every new model release, the expectations grow. I don't know how else to say that.

I think it is great that he now has this capability, but a total ignorance of software engineering is going to continually bite this type of user. Instead of questioning Claude's solution, my friend thought he just needed a faster computer.

He was also using very sketchy Python imports when much safer, more mature options are available. Not knowing that you shouldn't use just any random Python package is a ticking time bomb... especially when his machine is connected directly to his corporate intranet.

He's one of the nicest, most down-to-earth people I've ever worked with.

He had Claude essentially create a 300MB json file and was doing all of the data processing on that data directly.

It never occurred to him, or Claude, that there were other ways to operate on that data. It took me less than 10 minutes to get that processing time down to under a minute.

These are the type of issues that worry me about vibe coding.

They can also float just like a regular car.

I object to your statement that "copyright doesn’t get involved at all" when that is objectively untrue. If that was true, many of the world's largest companies wouldn't be spending tens of millions of dollars to have that question answered in court. Go to any law-focused forum, and you will find attorneys arguing over these questions.

To train a model using a book, you must first obtain a copy of that book. Did OpenAI purchase a copy of every book not already in the public domain used during training? They did not.

Some of the suits I mentioned claim that OpenAI literally stole copies of books to train its models.

My point is that the copyright question has not been answered. If the NYT, et. al. win, it will be a watershed moment for how AI companies pay for training data moving forward.

Answer: They did not. That is literally why there are dozens of ongoing lawsuits in progress.

The New York Times is suing both OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement. The Authors Guild is suing OpenAI. Getty Images is suing Stability AI. Disney is suing Midjourney. Universal Music Group and Sony have filed suits against multiple AI companies.

> so copyright doesn’t get involved at all.

The dozens of ongoing cases that discredit that statement.

That someone, at some point, paid for.

I'd like to understand why I can't use a song in one of my videos without permission/payment, but an AI company can train models using that song without having either.

I'm not anti-AI. I'd just like to see companies play by the rules everyone else has to follow.

I don't think we should "get over" the fact that modern SOTA models couldn't exist without being trained on protected works.

When I left MS, a full Windows build was about 18M LOC. The fact that 18 million lines of code, written by tens of thousands of engineers, worked at all was a mini miracle.

With regard to compensation: like Karpathy, I had already earned enough to be comfortable for the rest of my life. Once money stopped being the primary driver, I was able to focus on what made me happy. Building things, even if you don't like them, brought me happiness and fulfillment. I hope Andrej finds the same at Anthropic.

I have no idea if Andrej "sold out" but perhaps he realizes that if he wants to work on the cutting edge alongside talented people, with a seemingly endless budget, Anthropic is a good choice.

I chose my employers for the same reason; the compensation was secondary.