This is one of the first parts LLMs tried to automate. They were literally released in a form of chatbot. Whether it succeeded is another question.

> Did the world really wake up one day and concluded that, "wait, we're spending too much on musicians"?

I'm not sure about musicians specifically, but in the whole past decade studios have been complaining how costly it is to make AAA games. And the cost mostly came from art asset side.

> Here is the trick that you might have missed: somehow, Microsoft is able to charge per request, not per token. And a "request" is simply what I type into the chat box. Even if the agent spends the next 30 minutes chewing through my entire codebase, mapping dependencies, and changing hundreds of files, I still pay roughly $0.04.

Really? Lol. If it's true why would you publish it? To ensure Microsoft will patch it up and fuck up your workflow?

And I really don't think Trump looks worse than before. If they reached an agreement that allows Iran to take tolls for all the tankers passing, that would look really bad.

1. Should you care or even read SWE-bench etc. scores?

The answer is no, but it has nothing to do with the vulnerabilities presented in this article. There is absolutely no reason to care about a benchmark whose dataset has been publicly available for a while. Any other way to look at benchmark scores is cargo-culting.

2. What does this article actually tell us?

It means that even if you prepared a private set of problems as benchmark, you still need to pay extra attention to how AI actually solves them. You can't lie to yourself and think this process can be 100% automated, because LLMs, as this article shows, might get the tests passed without solving the problems in a meaningful way.

> The power needed to get a given amount of money doubles whenever the reward is halved.

Yes, by that moment it does.

And some miners still stop mining if mining became too unprofitable.

And the difficulty will decrease because less miners are mining.

And the power needed to get a given amount of bitcoin will decrease. (Not necessarily to the level before halving, ofc)

Or your comment was about this part of the grandparent comment:

> keep minting at the predetermined rate

?

If so, I think you misunderstood what they were trying to say (or their wording was misleading). It's a predetermined rate. Not a constant rate. It's predetermined to be halved at (roughly) certain moments. Halving happens about every four years, and pouring more power into mining won't make it happen significantly sooner or later. That's what they were trying to say.

https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/german-open-source-expe...:

> The German Foreign Office first moved over to Linux as a server platform in 2001... the Foreign Office of Germany made the announcement (translated news report) that it is migrating away from Linux back to Windows as its desktop solution.

https://interoperable-europe.ec.europa.eu/collection/open-so...:

> By December 2013, the city concluded the migration, with over 14,800 desktops running on LiMux... In November 2017, nearly four years after the conclusion of the migration, the Munich city council adopted a decision overhauling the move. All equipment was to be refitted with Windows 10 counterparts by 2020

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wienux:

> WIENUX[2] is a Debian-based Linux distribution developed by the City of Vienna in Austria... until 2008 when the download page was taken offline.

https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/POST...:

> Birmingham City Council piloted OSS on hundreds of desktops in its public libraries in 2005-6. It originally planned to install Linux ... but this was over-ambitious for the time frame of the project and compatibility problems meant that the open source OpenOffice (office suite) and Firefox (web browser) were eventually run on Windows XP

When Claude Code was released, there was a community leaderboard where people competed who could waste the most tokens. Let that sinks.

I know people, especially people who write code, like to blame "the other clueless people" for ruining their cheap token plan. But we're not stuck in the traffic. We're the traffic.

Ok

> ...and Go plans

Wtf lmao. Paying to watch ads is so normalized. Pathetic (the humanity as whole, not just OpenAI.)

"But we have laws criminalizing insider trading..." the only proper response to this is: hahahaha.

Don't know who those people are or if they exist, but not the brightest ones for sure.

You should feel so. Every time a thread about MCP on HN appears, half of the commenters obviously don't even know what MCP actually is and how it's used. Just right below someone suggests one should use "an API and a text file" instead of MCP (like, what do they think MCP is?).

On Twitter the ratio is even worse.

API vs MCP sounds like a real debate, but it really isn't. It's "API vs API discovery protocol." See how asinine it sounds if we call things for what they are.