I would add to that a few more open questions that I haven't seen addressed:
- As more engineers (and non-engineers) pick up coding agents, everyone is authenticating multiple MCPs, creating an n * n explosion of complexity that is impossible to centralise. Multiply this by the number of distinct coding agents for every platform and visibility is very tough. A lot of platforms also don't support scopes so you can't enforce safety short of a network proxy I suppose
- For non-developers mainly, lacking mental models such as <agent> for Y desktop app does not imply that there is a local LLM running on your machine. I suppose it's a question of trust and education versus starting conservative and progressively onboarding where we're more of the former.
- We talk a bit about the idea of sharing prompts but that fundamentally a prompt does not in itself contain quality. I've had internal tools I've made where it's mentioned that Claude made it when I mean, yes to a degree but I did many iterations using my own taste to refine things and held opinions about how things should operate. Giving someone a prompt won't inherently guarantee anything of quality. I often think about the idea of ie; give a screenshot of Github to an LLM but in a way, you're saying to create a clone, not of what exists today but is a dead echo of the design taste and choices made years ago that persist today. You can create things cheaply but without taste and good judgment, how can you continue to evolve it in a way that isn't like that draw the rest of the horse meme.
- I personally wonder about tokenmaxxing stories you hear about from other companies and like, logically what happens to glue roles? Does someone like a Microsoft just stack rank on token count and fire those who actually get work done? I suppose they already hollow out knowledge anyway so maybe it's nothing new.
- Definitely the thing with internal tooling where eventually you generate so much that you fundamentally have no mental model. It's fine for non-critical stuff and I'm kind of coming around to the idea that it's actually a better position to have no idea of the code and a strong "theory" of how a thing should work than it is to fully understand the code and have zero "theory". Ideally both of course.
Anyway, this isn't a comprehensive ramble but I've also been a bit disappointed that there hasn't been more talk about the second order effects. Many things can be true at once where you can see value in LLMs while still being critical of them and the whole DC situation ie; Colossus 1 etc.
Probably not too relevant but off the top of my head, the New Zealand Government's guidance on ransomware payments is that you could technically be fined if you pay a ransom to an entity in a sanctioned country, although it doesn't go into specifics
> An average unaware person believes that anything can be put in words and once the words are said, they mean to reader what the sayer meant, and the only difficulty could come from not knowing the words or mistaking ambiguities.
"Transmissionism" is a term I've seen to describe this
I had wondered if this was actually a bug and not intentional:
> When a user downloads or updates Chrome, Gemini Nano is downloaded on demand to ensure Chrome downloads the correct model for the user's hardware. The initial model download is triggered by the first call to a *.create() function (for example, Summarizer.create()) of any built-in AI API that depends on Gemini Nano.
This sounds like it could be possible that some part of Chrome, or perhaps a privileged website (ie; google.com), could be invoking `*.create()` 100% of the time? I don't actually know that this is what's going on or even if it's likely mind you.
It is also quite ironic that one of the docs pages is titled "Inform users of model download" although it goes on to talk about notifying in terms of model download time, not necessarily getting user consent:
Unfortunately, navigating to this page seems to display:
> Too many requests are being made from an unsupported application. This unfortunately degrades the experience and makes feeds slow for everyone else. Please try back later.
My first page load just now responded “Sorry / We seem to be having some technical difficulties. Hang tight...” (unknown status code). Second eventually returned 502 Gateway Timeout. Third gave 429 with the message you describe. Fourth eventually gave the actual page.
I'm very glad that Ars allows me to subscribe so that I don't have to see the ads. Some sites don't allow the option to pay for their service but force the free-but-ad-filled option on everyone
Oh, I missed the memo that Amazon Leo is the new name for Project Kuiper, rebranded in November of last year. I saw a presentation back when it was Kuiper so have still been calling it that
For readers who are vaguely aware of Steins;Gate, you may be interested to know that it's actually part of a wider universe called the Science Adventure series (or SciADV for short).
Steins;Gate works really well as a standalone entry (and I didn't even realise it wasn't a standalone thing until a year or two back) but it's part of a loose overarching canon.
Most of the games have various errors but there's a translation group called Committee of Zero who not only retranslate all of the games (sometimes from the ground up) but also do a lot of technical work. They've been doing essentially a reimplementation of the entire engine as well, although I don't know that it'd be accurate to say it's a clean room implementation or anything like that.
I will mention that the first entry, Chaos;Head NoAH takes a while to get going (like a few hours) and gets quite gruesome towards the end (to the point that I wanted to quit) but once you get past it, the rest is all a lot tamer in comparison.
The whole series is a very long time investment as far as VNs go but I personally got really into the series and spent a few months(!) just getting through the mainline entries which culminated with the most recent entry: Anonymous;Code.
Without going into any details, there's a loose canon across the series that Anonymous;Code finally digs into and makes you look at the entire series from a new angle. It's a bit controversial but I appreciated it.
It's not really that clear what the future of the series is as there's a remake coming up called Steins;??? where it appears to be a remake but there's a bunch of fans hoping that it's more in the vein of Final Fantasy 7 Remake where there's really more going on under the hood.
There are also the anime adaptions but I wouldn't recommend them. I've seen most of them, and I'm really not a snob about this sort of stuff but just due to the medium of VNs (with multiple routes and that), they aren't able to successfully replicate a lot of the twists and turns at all which take time to build up.
It's pretty bizarre to me to have even stuck with a VN let alone played through like 6 over the span of like half a year or more? Honestly, I'm not even sure if SciADV is actually "good" or if it's just one of the first franchises in a long time where I haven't ruined it for myself by reading Wikipedia in advance. I think it's pretty good though.
Not recommending the Steins;Gate anime adaption is pretty wild, it's an incredibly highly rated Anime series. The story telling language of a VN and an Anime are very different so it's no surprise they don't perfectly capture the complexities of the other medium. They don't have to be the same to be worth watching.
fwiw: no idea on the other anime adaptions quality
Oh yeah, the Steins:Gate animes are perfectly fine to be clear! I was only thinking of the non-SG animes which are... pretty messy!
The Chaos;Head anime barely makes any sense, even having read the VN because it only got 12 episodes. I haven't finished Chaos;Child or Robotics;Notes which seem fine so far for C;C anyway, it doesn't quite feel the same.
There is Occultic;Nine which anime only in that the VN was never localised plus the game itself isn't on Steam so there's nothing to base a patch off of.
Anyway, take my thoughts with a grain of salt and not like some correct stance haha
Do you think the Chaos;Head anime could have been good like SG if it had had more episodes? Or is the fundamental nature of a VN story hard to adapt to a linear anime format?
I came into Steins;Gate completely cold. I watched it when it came out and I only just realised there's more to the universe. It's a ridiculously good anime, probably a top 10 for me. It's got a really cool storyline with loads of plot twists, interesting characters and deep mystery.
> Well, it's more because of its cult status (especially on imageboards) than actual objective appreciation.
No way. There are nearly 3M user ratings on that website. How many of those would you say belong to regular imageboard users? A few tens of thousands, tops? And when was the last time you saw a Steins;Gate meme?
Worth watching? Not really but they are definitely worth playing. It's hard to fault the anime adaptions because they have limited time compared to the 20 - 40 hours that some of the VNs take. Many of the other entries (Chaos;Child is great) are definitely worth it but won't really hit as well if you're just watching the adaption. The main reason being that VNs have multiple paths so they reveal information piece by piece. The adaptions generally try to include all of the information at once in a linear fashion but it doesn't really have the same effect.
I focused too much on the non-Steins;Gate works when I replied (as pointed out elsewhere) so to be clear, when I say "worth watching", I was referring to the "other animes" bit. Steins;Gate's adaptions are great! It's the other SciADV anime adaptions that aren't quite on the same level
Well, I assume this is all just generated with Claude Code, right? Whether there is much back and forth with the LLM is a valid question and nothing wrong with generating websites (I do it too for some side projects). Claude loves generating websites with a particular style of serif font. We also saw this with https://tboteproject.com/timeline/ and I've just generally seen it from various designs that coworkers have spit out over months using Claude defaults.
I guess I just find it weird because all the signals are messed up so whenever I see these sorts of layouts, I feel like I'm looking at the average where I don't think "gorgeous and interesting" at all. Instead, I'm forced to think "I should be skeptical of this based on the presentation because it presents as high quality but this may be hiding someone who is not actually aware of what they're presenting in any depth" as the author may have just shoved in a prompt and let it spin.
There's actually a similarly designed website (font weights, font styles etc) here in New Zealand (https://nzoilwatch.com/) where at a glance, it might seem like some overloaded professional-backed thing but instead it's just some guy who may or may not know anything about oil at all, yet people are linking it around the place like some sort of authoritative resource.
I would have way less of an issue if people just put their names by things and disclosed their LLM usage (which again, is fine) rather than giving the potentially false impression to unequipped people that the information presented is actually as accurate and trustworthy as the polish would suggest.
We do need "hard effortful careful work" to keep planes flying, electrical grids running and medical devices safe. It's very relevant but very undervalued by our current economy.
That was the leaked code and now it's just some random dudes harness btw. He swapped it out. Did a sloppy find and replace for "claude" and made it claw.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47393437
I would add to that a few more open questions that I haven't seen addressed:
- As more engineers (and non-engineers) pick up coding agents, everyone is authenticating multiple MCPs, creating an n * n explosion of complexity that is impossible to centralise. Multiply this by the number of distinct coding agents for every platform and visibility is very tough. A lot of platforms also don't support scopes so you can't enforce safety short of a network proxy I suppose
- For non-developers mainly, lacking mental models such as <agent> for Y desktop app does not imply that there is a local LLM running on your machine. I suppose it's a question of trust and education versus starting conservative and progressively onboarding where we're more of the former.
- We talk a bit about the idea of sharing prompts but that fundamentally a prompt does not in itself contain quality. I've had internal tools I've made where it's mentioned that Claude made it when I mean, yes to a degree but I did many iterations using my own taste to refine things and held opinions about how things should operate. Giving someone a prompt won't inherently guarantee anything of quality. I often think about the idea of ie; give a screenshot of Github to an LLM but in a way, you're saying to create a clone, not of what exists today but is a dead echo of the design taste and choices made years ago that persist today. You can create things cheaply but without taste and good judgment, how can you continue to evolve it in a way that isn't like that draw the rest of the horse meme.
- I personally wonder about tokenmaxxing stories you hear about from other companies and like, logically what happens to glue roles? Does someone like a Microsoft just stack rank on token count and fire those who actually get work done? I suppose they already hollow out knowledge anyway so maybe it's nothing new.
- Definitely the thing with internal tooling where eventually you generate so much that you fundamentally have no mental model. It's fine for non-critical stuff and I'm kind of coming around to the idea that it's actually a better position to have no idea of the code and a strong "theory" of how a thing should work than it is to fully understand the code and have zero "theory". Ideally both of course.
Anyway, this isn't a comprehensive ramble but I've also been a bit disappointed that there hasn't been more talk about the second order effects. Many things can be true at once where you can see value in LLMs while still being critical of them and the whole DC situation ie; Colossus 1 etc.