For more than a year now I was renting a limited GPU server for ~300$/month to learn, experiment, research and build internal tooling around open weight models. Thinking they are tools with potential and buying the exaggerated marketing are different things.

My history of comments on HN lands often on both providing what I believe to be my insights working with LLMs and calling out exaggerations, stupid terms of service, and the other mishaps in the field. You are free to browse them if you'd like to see my broader opinion.

When AI firms ate more than half of global VC private investment in 2025 https://www.oecd.org/en/about/news/announcements/2026/02/ai-... I would expect better results than what we have today.

The most well paid people in the industry brought us here. And "here" is very much as fuzzy as last year with better harnessing towards the local optima. And I say local optima because even the perceived capabilities have slowed down, nevermind the benchmark numbers which are in aggrement.

The best paid engineers in the world, with almost no practical budget limit, still deliver shoddy quality software with AI. Is that not fact? And if it is what does that say for the rest of us.

You are allowed to believe. I'm still waiting for the beneficial results, not only those that benefit griefters, hackers and scammers. AI has been a huge boon there.

Reality will materialize and markets will redress hopefully once they go public. Which they very much seem to be hesitant to do right now.

A postgres index post is unlikely to reach front page. It's already part if the docs, and should include more context to be read worthy.

They are not equal comparison.

This before the fact that there is no guarantee that a model follows your agent instructions (plenty of easy to reach for research on it), and you also get suggestions by devs at these companies to wipe parts of your model's instructions because the model is better now tm.

If cloud providers change their billing quasi monthly, and if you'd need to fiddle with your indexes every couple of days. I'm not sure we'd be using them as much.

There is interesting information about the inference pipeline, but almost too late to the party (by at least a year), and for which audience? Techies understand in broad strokes the tech if they are interested, normies will definitely not read it.

All that to say, that yes, it's worth having a laugh. If for nothing else, as a release valve for all the problems they create in the real non-VC world.

Anthropic is IPOing in October according to news, you might be interested in investing.

However for anything consumer protection related, they must not be only transparent, but I'd argue, clearly obvious who is behind the service.

In the context of the previous comment there was an implied equivalence between individual and corporation rights to privacy.

Large corporations already get lenient passes for breaking the laws and regulations. Let us not propagate ideas that champion for even more things that benefit corporations.

Which recent verdict?

> It would be interesting to see how this effects the copyleft Licences with contributors are using AI for the PRs

I know Linux and GCC have been diligent about tagging and tracking LLM based contributions. In the worst case they can chuck it all out and handwrite it back.

Many of these skills, rules, "playbooks", and such are kitchensink attempts at steering the model. It augments the model to frame it's reasoning according to project rules and flows, but cannot be really trusted to adhere to it. More of a vibe guideline.

The recall text was a simple hash generated, filler text from a dictionary file and a request at the end to return only the hash from the beginning of the prompt. Past 32k characters the response contained hallucinations of characters or full hashes.

Just having large context size doesn't paint a full picture of capabilities, prompt adherence and other quality metrics.

> The concern is familiar: NVIDIA money funds customers who then buy NVIDIA chips.

It can also be read as health-sensible reminder given the climate warnings. AC units demand is already up 26% year over year in my country (according to our biggest online retailer, a month ago). Will be a highly profitable year for manufacturers.

Because I find your words surprising since critique is what I was raised with in the late 90s early 2000s. Offline and in the media.

At the same time your definition of criticizing is very lax, when I'm stating banal opinions and a broad observation.

I think Musk's luck is running out, he's been too political this past year and he seems to also have run out of geek "street cred". Remember youtubers visiting (whatever the Tesla trade show was called) were more perplexed than impressed with what has been shown. Similar sentiment seen across trade shows (like CES) where everything was AI and no one seemed to ask themselves "why are we putting AI in this?". The answer, of course, for startups and stock listed companies, to make themselves more valuable on paper.

Investors would probably be aware of that if they run any kind of sentiment analysis on online social media content. And at the same time there's some pull-out from tech stock. So maybe some are starting to realise that things are too shaky for their risk profile?

Though for the later ones, one might also ask themselves if they are worth their cost when using 20-30% of provided functionality.

Anything with a face, I'm tired of that trope of banknote design.