> Often - the people who are replaced don't recognize the inherent skills of the people who operate the machines that do their work.

It's not so much the people who _operate_ the machines as the people who _build_ the machines.

A very, very long time ago, at my first job, the people who used anything other than C were considered 'fake' developers and were resentful that everything was shifting away from C for most things. I felt that :)

> Won't super power AI tools allow companies to do more with the same number of people?

I think this is directionally right, but I think there might be a scaling/organization problem for companies, and that the more likely outcome is that _small companies_ are going to start punching way over their weight class.

I suspect the opposite. Products don't win because they are better. They win because monopolies control the sales/regulators. Bit occasionally the big companies fucked up the actual product development so badly an upstart could emerge. With ai they will quickly just copy any success and all the other big orgs will just buy the AI ripoff version.

I was working with opus 4.7 on a math formalization problem for several days and 4.8 one-shotted the proof from a clean description as soon as the update came through. I was very surprised.

> if you can compute a derivative by 12th grade, it's due to racial discrimination benefiting you or something.

--

It's not really racial discrimination per se, but there's a strong parental-educational/economic/class element which is still tied to race in the US unfortunately.. It's not reason not to have high school calculus but it's still something to keep in account.

If you're an investor in Anthropic you probably _don't want them_ to be profitable right now. They should be spending literally 100% of their money and then some on training and compute.

If the main improvements are coming from improving the harnesses and other things around the AI, I can't help but wonder if the incremental improvement in each model is worth the training costs. I know these companies are in a "race" (where's the finish line, though?), but personally I don't see a huge difference between like Opus 4.7 vs 4.6 vs 4.5, and the newer Codex seems very expensive for the gains it theoretically provides.

Short answer: No Long answer: prester john was probably inspired by a mixture of rumors of various asian churches.

I was joking, but my question remains: what was that community?

I would think the most likely use for evtol (assuming, for the sake of argument, that whatever sci-fi technology needs to be invented will be invented to make it cost effective) is autopilot flights that are currently long commutes with a lot of traffic -- ie: Suburbs to city center and back, or long cross suburb trips.

Autopilot with strictly regulated maintenance and no personal ownership is about the only way it works, assuming your neighbors don't care about the noise

Yeah I have had claude take over multiple internal (human written) projects that were in a dire state and spent a week just completely refactoring them and adding exhaustive tests before doing any new features. It's worth starting from a clean slate.

Even if you hire more people into jobs where AI acts a multiplier, there are still going to have to be layoffs where AI basically makes certain jobs _redundant_. I think both things are happening and will continue to happen, and happened anytime new technology came out.