I wrote a new essay about a strange inversion in AI-assisted programming. Old-school programming made sustained attention the scarce resource. You entered a tight loop with the machine, and the difficulty itself kept you engaged. Agentic coding changes that. To reach the same intensity, you keep more work in flight, run more agents, and consume more inference. Flow becomes throughput, then the usage meter appears. There are legitimate economic reasons for limits. But when higher plans are explicitly sold as freedom from interruption, uninterrupted access to your own momentum becomes the produ…
OpenAI and Anthropic have entered the RSI era. OpenAI Research Progress Is Accelerating Due To OpenAI Research Progress OpenAI has been opening up lately about many things. The most important issue of all is that of the acceleration and automation of AI R&D.
It's true that Meta's rivals do largely employ the same cocktail of video formats, recommendation algorithms, and push notifications to continuously derail their users' attention.
Why? We engaged early. We made the regulators part of the team and we worked together. We made it boom plus FAA versus the problem, not Boom versus FAA.
a more relevant metric in the long term is the cost, not the efficiency, of food production methods at sustainable levels of energetic and material throughput.
Standardized systems are important, and there is a systems premium in the US and UK, but it can't be about a regular pipeline because London has that and yet Crossrail engaged in some really dodgy systems decisions that drove costs up.
We made this something useful for adults and we had this user pay model that could monetize your engagement instead of trying to show you an ad and getting you to leave the game to go somewhere else. It actually the more engaged you were, the more likely you were to, you know, spend money.
They could release claw slow mode and have an increase in tokens per dollar by a significant amount. Um they could probably like reduce the price of Opus 46 by you know 4x 5x and reduce the speed by another by maybe just like 2x like the curve on inference throughput versus speed is there already just on hm um and yet they don't um because no one actually wants to use a slow model
the improvement software improvements of really throughput in terms of tokens per dollar per watt that we're able to get uh you know quarter over quarter year over year is massive uh right so it's 5x 10x maybe 40x in some of these cases
It's a really great read. I read this in two days when my life was very busy, and I really shouldn't have been taking time off to sit in the corner and read, but I just kept wanting to return to it because I was marvellously entertained and engaged by it.
A korrent is a belief a person has stated in their own words: one
sentence stating the claim, backed by a quote and a source, kept at
korrents.com.
Under a name here, the quoted block is what they actually said.
The korrent beneath it is the claim those words support, in
korrents' wording — tap it to see the record, its source, and who
else holds it.
Nobody here wrote their own korrents. They are compiled from public
statements, and a person can change their mind, which is recorded too.
About the English under a post
Some people here publish in a language other than English. Where they
do, this site shows a machine translation beneath the post, in
this typeface — the site's own, not theirs.
The post itself is never changed, moved or hidden: what is set in the
serif above is exactly what the person published, and it is what to
quote them on. A translation can be wrong in ways that matter,
especially about tone.
Only the post's own words are translated. A quoted post, a linked
article and a belief on korrents.com
are left in their original language.