Also, I haven't found a cross-platform + cross-agent mechanism to set permissions. Much less one that works.

Right now, I'm working on a hook that checks for changes in source files, but the plug-in system (at least of opencode) seems quite buggy.

Security? At this stage, I'm a bit afraid that it's a joke more than anything else.

Wouldn't they be bragging about it to investors? It feels like something that would matter a lot to them, and at least OpenAI kinda feels desperate to find them.

There's also the small question about whether a drop in inference cost would actually change anything about profitability, when training seems to get exponentially more expensive.

Something like incorrect SELinux configurations?

We're running forward without any idea of how we can get agents to write code that is even remotely safe or secure. It _will_ blow up with increasingly large blast radiuses.

I believe that I was right.

Not sure what you mean, I was using COM and C++ for Windows development in the late 90s.

> So there is no elision, it is AddRef/Release all over the place.

...and constructing an object is an insanely complex (and expensive) operation.

That's how I interpret the move, too.

Much as GitHub calls everything an "issue" and GitLab a "work item".

Also, Cloudflare hosts some AI services, so it's possible that some consumers are running Python code in their containers, without the wasm sandbox.

Has Ubuntu published patches yet?

>

> ??

During the last 30+ years, the trend has always been to increase hardware use to save on development/thinking time. AI is the latest and most extreme version of it.

> Argentina is hardly a free market country - https://borgenproject.org/hunger-in-argentina/

Are you by any chance moving the goalposts?

I think we have all heard of (or are living through) mandates to prove that AI makes us more productive, or else...

We'll see how many of these actually works out.

Is that free market?

> Where are the starving people in capitalist countries?

The first example from the top of my head is Argentina.

> A large part of profit maximization (i.e. optimizing) usually means reducing the amount of material needed. Isn't that a good thing?

This very much depends on the industry. In software, for instance, it's exactly the opposite.

> The people who "rough it" in the wilderness still seem to be backpacking in hi tech equipment. I read about the kit that Lewis & Clark carried. No thanks. (Even on that "Alone" show, they bring hi tech equipment.)

No idea what you're talking about.

On the one side, it has succeeded at reducing costs, which has indeed given rich societies unprecedented access to consumer goods.

On the other, it has outsourced from us both jobs and knowledge, which has resulted in higher unemployment and dissatisfaction, with as consequences the political dominoes we see falling internationally. That and the shoddy US health system (which the rest of the world seems to have decided to follow, for some reason).

And there is the small fact that we're in the process of optimizing the planet to death, and that not-so-rich countries (as well as formerly-rich ones) have starved to death for this high standard of living.

So, let's appreciate our standard of living, but not assume that it's necessarily a good thing in the grand scheme of things.