my understanding is that employees of several of the largest companies in the world get access to it atm. Those employees are overrepresented in places like HN

These employees may be as well under NDA, or their access may be predicated on them not sharing actual data (like Oracle and benchmarks). Anyway, you can’t verify any claims yourself, thus it might as well not exist.

the article here is pretty clearly a response to the one you posted

It’s only clear if you know it exists, and now I know it exists thanks to gp.

have you ever run automated tests on postgres? how long did they take?

the text content of the site is not what is ballooning the RAM.

are you aware of the history of mental institutions and insanity charges being used to suppress political dissidents around the world? Most notably in the USSR but the west has also done this sort of thing.

using what physical process? How exactly do they detect any metal? A genuine question.

You can detect nonferrous metals by inducing eddy currents in them, then they become magnetic.

can it go back and use future blocks as context? Thats what i'm most interested in here - fixing line 2 because of a change/discovery we made in the process of writing line 122. I think that problem is a big part of the narrowsightedness of current coding models

Exactly. The current (streaming) way means that once it makes a decision, it's stuck with it. For example, variable naming: once it names it something, it's stuck using that name in the future. Where as a human would just go back and change the name.

Maybe "thinking" will fix this aspect, but I see it as a serious shortcoming.

I got the exact same thing. But trying out another few prompts I couldn't get it to happen again. I wonder if its a bug with the cahcing/website? I can't imagine they actually run interference each time you use one of the sample prompts?

In an era where creating such libraries is much cheaper than validating that they're useful or work, yeah you really should validate it before you expect someone to use it. Nobody is going around trying out every slop project they see, they'd be wasting hours and hours for no gain at all.

This all being said, I do find the idea interesting, but heeded it's advice when it said it's hideously expensive and risky to use. So yes, I do want someone braver, richer, and stupider than me to take the first leap

can you elaborate on your thesis as to why? it seems to me, with raw code being less of a bottleneck, things like understanding the spec, polishing, and doing the fuzzy work around the edges become all the more important. These were never strengths of outsourcing. In fact, I think that the fact that those parts are important is a big reason why the profession as a whole wasnt entirely just outsourced, despite the compelling economic reasons for it.

See my other comment in this thread.