At least the zealots who knockon my door. I've had a few good conversations.

Ditto for LLM sentience. We have no evidence either way.

It's a series of... numerical recipes. Nice descriptions of many numerical algorithms sufficient to use them.

It's not focused on physics. It's also not rigorous.

The Sussman / Wisdom reference is rigorous.

Why would you post about a book you haven't read?

In 2026, I don't want to do numerical programming in C. That was fine 30 years ago, but today, I expect to have garbage collection or to be able to multiply a matrix as A×B.

I'm not sure how important but- for-bug identical output really is.

The longterm costs of that -- crime, mental health, etc. -- explain why subsidies make sense. Every rich country has universal public education for a good reason.

Market forces, as you point out, will drive your enterprising person making 72k out-of-business very quickly, and the market becomes a cesspool.

With reasonable overhead numbers (space, management, compliance, licensing, taxes, etc.), that's a poverty-level income for preschool teachers.

There is a strong argument for subsidies, at least in countries which have low birth rates and care about longterm social outcomes.

I've "solved" many math problems with LLMs, with LLMs giving full confidence in subtly or significantly incorrect solutions.

I'm very curious here. The Open AI memory orders and claims about capacity limits restricting access to better models are interesting too.

The key question is about why they want to you to use the CLI. If you're not the customer, you're the product.

There's also a monopolistic aspect to this. Having the best model isn't something over can legally exploit to gain advantage in adjacent markets.

It reeks of "Windows isn't done until Lotus won't run," Windows showing spurious error messages for DR-DOS, and Borland C++ losing to the then-inferior Visual C++ due to late support of new Windows features. And Internet Explorer bundling versus Netscape.

Yes, Microsoft badly wanted you to use Office, Visual C++, MS-DOS, and IE, but using Windows to get that was illegal.

Microsoft lost in court, paid a nominal fine, and executives were crying all the way to the bank.

Sounds like a place I wouldn't want to work (and filtering for the reverse stance would be equally problematic).

Do you think things will work better if we have pro-Israel and pro-Palestine companies with the two groups never talking?

The flip side is that a lot of government jobs lead to pretty good private sector opportunities working with those same agencies. If you want to contact to DOE, knowing how it works in the inside and knowing people there definitely helps.

A lot of military contractors are former military. Who better to design something for a soldier than a soldier?

I do think it's proven useful, much like the internet had in the nineties.

Diversification is resilience.

Putting consumer on hold makes some sense. An exit? This will be written about in business books.

As a shady for-profit, there is none. That's the problem with this particular fraud.

We're a few years in. It takes time to figure things out and see returns.

The web and dot com boom and bust still led to several trillion dollar companies, eventually.

AI will transform my industry, but not overnight. My employer is within that 95%... but won't be forever.

Grant built a brilliant tool for himself. He's not interested in doing the work to make it useful to others, or even allow PRs to do so. He's glad to have others do that in their own fork.

The community edition does all the stuff needed to make this useful to anyone who isn't Grant. Everyone, Grant included, seems to appreciate that.

Grant's version has poor documentation, bugs, quirks, etc. Unless you're Grant, get CE.

Grant did the hard work of inventing this thing. That's harder than it sounds; many tried before and failed.

CE did the boring work of making it usable for others.

Click 'site guidelines' when posting. You'll see.

I don't like that rule, but it is a rule.