HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | automatic6131's commentslogin

Obviously, we don't move in a direction of agent-to-agent flow because it's fundamentally flawed and worse than the status quo

Jensen Huang gets red in the face and tight in the pants thinking about all these institutions running infinity agents in a red queen's race for the status quo

I'm going to have to remember this, gold comment


You are too civilized: I recommend threatening drop kicks to insufficiently smart rebuttlers.


The people building, funding, and managing the builders of these tools have completely forgotten (if they ever knew) that most people treat one hundred dollars carefully.

To the, "oh I'd just setup a card/account with a five figure limit" completely unaware of how much that is to a typical person: even to responsible, educated people who are doing everything "right": working hard, without expensive vices, and planning for the future.

The "builders" have so much money and no time or attention that it's hard for them to spend it, which is why they keep trying to get AI to buy stuff for them, whereas those of us who live in reality have far more things they want than dollars to buy them with.


I agree with a lot of this statement, but I would argue that this has been the case for a long time. See the giant list of social startups


The top 10% of spenders account for 49% of US consumer spending. They're not completely brainless; they're targeting rich people.


Rich people are mostly retards who had rich parents. What now?


The limiting factor of development (for money) is good ideas, or valuable ideas. If you have 5 features you want, but only time in a month for 2, then that forces you to choose the best 2, which come with the tech debt, support and opportunity cost.

Removing the opportunity cost doesn't eliminate the other two costs of a feature


AGI hasn't arrived, all we have is Artifical General Marketing


AI hasn't arrived either. I always find it so weird how marketing suddenly redefines words and concepts.


I can tolerate Teams being a bit mid because the core functionality nearly always works. I can tolerate Outlook being meh because it's doing a lot (nothing I, a lowly IC really need though I can imagine the top hatted boss who does) and I think it does okay with the scope it's tackling.

But the M365 copilot app is inexcusable for being as core to Microslop's strategy.


Lol, teams has had two multi-hour global outages this year.


It's such a broken POS. Code snippets, especially for html, frequently don't render, or if they do, they render as rendered html which will frequently be an empty box, and you have to manually (for each snippet box) switch to show code mode.

Trillion dollar industry btw.


Don't worry about. Claude Code wrote 1 million lines of tests for this functionality, that's how you know your luddite eyes are lying to you.


Jevon's paradox isn't a physical law, it doesn't magically apply to everything. Millions more copies of Atari's ET game didn't cause everyone to pickup a cheap copy, and cause extra demand for a garbage video game. Some times (actually, usually, I'd argue) things are made that will sell for less than the cost of construction because of irrationality, and they don't induce extra demand and they don't change the negative profit margins.

You can't simply wave Jevon's paradox at things. Thousands of miles of canals were dug in the UK that couldn't be sustained and were abandoned. Thousands of miles of railways were laid that could be sustained and were abandoned. And those are potentially durable investments, unlike cheap walls, pillars and roofs laid over a levelled concrete slab full of fast depreciating IT equipment.


It's true that Jevon's paradox doesn't always apply, although this does seem like a classic case.

But yes, if sold for a negative margin Jevon eventually stops because the decreasing supply will drive up prices.

> things are made that will sell for less than the cost of construction

Price is set at the marginal cost. Capital costs aren't in marginal costs.

You'll need a better counter-example than UK railways which suffered from Parliament price-fixing.


I agree, but I would say what the parent is saying is more akin to Say's law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_creates_its_own_demand


> You can't simply wave Jevon's paradox at things

I'm so glad the tide here is turning on this talking point, brought on by exactly the same people beating us over the head with it for months while no progress is made towards it materializing.

Many, many people who post here are capable neither of real analysis nor distinguishing real analysis from memes. They aren't hackers, they are adherents of a cult that happens to focus on the same subject matter as hackers.


Jevon's paradox only applies to products with near infinite demand. Energy being the most famous example. I dont think its difficult to argue that compute/intelligence is also a base input into the economy and theres almost no limit to the amount of intelligence the world will want.


Jevon's Paradox, RSI, revealed preference


Jev, ASI, RLHF, Jev, Jev, water usage


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: