Dario does a good job of addressing that in this essay. He lists several potential levels of global agreements that could be beneficial to all parties. For example, having models capable of bioterrorism hurts both the US and its “adversaries”. It’s likely we could get global agreement that these capabilities benefit nobody.
I believe Dario has good intentions regarding global agreements. However, I find it difficult believing government’s public statements will match their private behaviors. I would bet that the US government is developing models with potentially devastating capabilities because they cannot guarantee that other countries won’t do the same. Maybe we’ll end up having something like mutually assured destruction with AI models similar to what we have today with nuclear weapons.
I don’t have any skin in the game with this, and I don’t use WP. It appears Matt needs help right now. I don’t think he’s reacting rationally based on what he’s posting online or allegedly inside his former organization. I don’t know him, but it’s hard seeing people in a difficult time who need help.
Using ChatGPT.com for coding tasks has to be a joke in 2026, right? I assumed everyone is using Codex/Claude Code/OpenCode/Pi by now if you’re using these tools.
Yeah! Seems like that's the assumption in this ongoing discussion, so I thought my point of view would be interesting. I'm not saying I'm doing it the right way, possibly I'm being very stupid, but the point here is that it's not just the "normies" who don't know what Sol is.
Lots of large enterprises and organizations have security policies that make it very hard to self-install these tools and haven’t figured out they should add them to their approved software list yet. Federal government in particular is still very slow
I have a hard time seeing how Meta is betting people will trust them to serve as their AI agent provider. Based on their track record data privacy and tracking, why would I trust them with my most sensitive data? That’s a hard sell.
I think for most people there is a big gulf between information posted to social and their entire email inbox, their credit card details, passwords, etc.
For this kind of tool to be useful it basically has to be able to impersonate you digitally. I know I personally have zero trust for Meta to do this securely and without exploiting me, whereas Google I feel a lot better about here. After all Google has made a business out of safeguarding data with gmail, drive, etc. Same with Microsoft and Apple. Meta, OpenAI, not so much.
I still have a Facebook account to stay connected with my family and friends. However, I have no trust in Meta to handle my health or financial information, as I am quite certain they will sell or use it for marketing purposes.
On the other hand, I’m always surprised how little many seem to care about data privacy.
I worked one place where I had a team of 4 offshore devs replace my two good people. Three months of some of the worst quality work I’ve ever seen. And I was responsible for it on paper.
Decided fuck it, promoted one of them to manager and gave him a project to finish in 3 months, leading the other 3.
In that three months I redid that entire project, did their current project and a week of another one. All in a 25 hour week calendar.
People already look me like crazy when I still review all the code changes AI does, and not even using the agent directly. And make it do things differently if it is unmaintainable slop. Their argument is that are you really going to modify the code by hand in the future?
As a Canadian, we are mostly just laughing about how childish he is. As a Canadian business owner who has American customers, I’m far more concerned about his temper tantrums relating to trade, however so far they have not impacted my sector.
Not sure what’s there to apologize about. Canada can still call it Lake Ontario right? Or I wonder if it matters whether it’s on American soil or not whether international bodies recognize it?
The difference being that in the movie Idiocracy the President didn't assume he knew everything and was willing to listen to people who knew more than him.
This trolling and misdirection are not in the movie. Also, both are clearly effective, and a discourse that warps economic impact on US midterms voters within identities, reduces the chance of exposing the bad consequences and risks of power-politics. So this is quite well timed, and the outrageous quotient is I think also well calibrated.
Charles Chaplin understood it, so please y'all catch up ASAP.
I feel like I am not good at anticipating election results, but anyway, the people arguing that the midterms will be a referendum on the economy make sense to me.
Expensive gas and groceries are pretty unpopular. I guess some chunk of people will find a way to wholly blame Biden or whatever.
> I guess some chunk of people will find a way to wholly blame Biden or whatever.
Markwayne Mullin, DHS Secretary, just yesterday:
“You have a Biden administration that is failing the American people because they are allowing millions of people to come into this country illegally.”
20 months in to a 48 month term and they're still blaming the last guy, and phrasing it as if the last guy is still actively doing things other than having cancer.
The whole admin is a bunch of clowns. And unfortunately they benefit from a right wing media machine that reinforces the nonsense, and a general media environment that is more than willing to sanewash and downplay.
> Yes, but it's also Trump and the GOP self-immolating. November is going to be a historic electoral wipeout.
> I expect the next administration will push through some laws limiting this sort of idiocy.
The problem is that the bar is now so low that basically anybody will win, by design.
They'll pass some surface level bullshit to treat symptoms, like how lakes can or cannot be renamed. But they'll fail to address any root, systemic issues that allowed this BS to unfold in the first place, paving the way for the other half of the Uniparty to resume power 4-8 years later.
Such laws would be useful everywhere. First rule: whatever you decide, it's effective after 6 months. Second rule: you can't change first or second rule.
Why not choose to feel patriotic about the decision. It gives us recognition for what we've done with the body of water. Arguably the fact that you feel embarrassed or need to apologize shows the lack of patriotism you feel over the body of water, so I think this new name can help future people feel patriotic over it. There is a lot of power in a name.
Simon, thanks for all the great work you do. I definitely appreciate your contributions to discussion threads here as well as your blog. I learned so much from you.
reply