Dude, 10x token speed is going to be absolutely nuts. Half the "parallel subagent workflow" business seems to be driven simply as a means to avoid tapping your thumbs waiting for the infernal robot to finish something. If things come back speedy quick all the time, it should keep up with the "speed of the human" and let me stay focused on one thread instead of half a dozen. Plus the cost of screwing up gets significantly lower because you just re-fire with an adjusted prompt and iterate.

Someday these things will be 100x as fast as they are today and that is when things will get insane.

I assert like 80% of this “multi agent parallel workflow” business is simply a workaround to models being soooooo slow. Like as the dude driving these things… you kick it off and twiddle your thumbs waiting minutes to hours sometimes for all the inference and token generator to finish. So you dispatch multiple workstreams in parallel to be more efficient.

I assert that if the model was even 10x faster we’d be using these things radically different. You’d be doing things that are currently time prohibitive. At 100x, holy shit will software dev get crazy. You’d be kicking off hundreds of parallel workers attacking a problem from every angle and stuff. Who even knows!!!

And the thing is, 10x will absolutely come and probably even 100x. And it will be sold like a video game cartridge or something depending on how the actual model gets “baked” into the hardware. No remote inference at all.

Brain science people “love” traumatic brain injury cases because it can help explore what happens when bits of the “brain wafer” get damaged. We’ve learned a lot from such things.

I wonder if people are intentionally “destroying” parts of the model weights to learn more about what happens? Like could you strategically wipe a gig of the model so it’s “all zeros” and see what happens?

I have to wonder

The crazy thing to me is that this kind of “composition of small tools to create something bigger” is the biggest vindication of the Unix philosophy I can think of.

I have to wonder how much of that behavior was trained into the model and how much it is the secret herbs and spices they toss into the harnesses own system prompts.

Those recruiter spams generally just copy and paste the companies own JD so the LLM can usually figure out the source company.

At least with a consignment shop I will hopefully get something out of the deal.

It’s really quite dystopian and anti-human if you ask me. We’ve already lost so much shared mediums—nobody watches the same shows, reads the same media, etc. which in isolation is completely fine. But something has to be shared with other real physical humans and it has to be more than just occasional grocery store visits, run-ins at the park, etc.

I dunno quite how to articulate it very well though. It’s just remote work has a nasty side effect of making humans even more isolated from people not like themselves. It makes us all increasingly divided and “othered”. And that isn’t good for anybody.

It absolutely destroyed a ton of very good things, perhaps forever.

All this fuzzyness from Anthropic reads more like an incredibly fast growing company working in a brand new space full of uncharted waters. In other words, they are making shit up not because they suck but because that is literally all one can do.

As opposed to dodgy windows-only installable software from some weird site to flash devices instead? I’ll take my chances with webusb, thanks.

There are multiple ways these tools access your site and only one of them is “using it for training”. Others are webfetch from chat sessions, “deep research” agents, etc. And those will have different traffic patterns. They aren’t crawlers, they are clumsy, ham handed AI agents doing their humans bidding.

Both can give a site the hug of death. Both can be badly coded. But there is much different intent behind the two and I feel it is important to acknowledge the difference.

I mean isn’t that an okay exemption? If the intent is to drive devices to be less disposable and more sustainable… if it incentivizes all mobile phone manufacturers to improve battery longevity, I’d say that’s a win.

I wouldn’t even call it a loophole. The entire purpose of the legislation could be that clause