Irveloper

Software Engineer | Web Platform | #a11y | #DX | #Infra | #DevOps | @Azure Certified | Tweets in Spanglish

[Irveloper @irveloper]

Be the architect of your habits and not the victim of them

[Dean W. Ball @deanwball]

Some observations on Kimi:

1. It's a very good model! I don't think its performance can be explained away by distillation or anything like that. In agentic coding sessions, it seems pretty much on par with the best public models of Q1 2026. In my fairly limited use, it also seemed very token hungry. It's not obvious to me that this model is actually that cheap to run.

2. I am personally surprised the Chinese state continues to allow the open sourcing of models this good, given potential risks. To be clear, I *myself* might be fine with models presenting this level of marginal risk being open weight, but I am surprised that China is fine with it. I suspect the reason they are is 75% explained by strategic blindness/lack of AGI-pilledness (the CCP is very Yann Lecun-y in its views of AI). The other 25% or so is their lack of compute for customer inference (making China's open-weight strategy an unintended byproduct of US export controls) and the normal Chinese strategy of aggressive exports. For the companies, as opposed to the government, the decision to open source is partially ideological and partially because they are behind, and they know that very few people would pay for sub-frontier models from China.

3. Open-weight models are inherently decelerationist, and I'm continually surprised to see the so-called "accelerationists" so excited about open-weight models. I suspect the reason they are is that they know open-weight models are effectively ungovernable, and they simply like the overall cloak of ungovernability open-weight models create over the whole of AI. It's not a bad strategy; it reminds me of James Scott's recounting of the hill people in "the art of not being governed." Still, in the end, open-weight models deter further AI capex.

4. One probable outcome of an open-weight-model-dominant world is full AI communism, which is precisely what China proposes: rather than a market product, AI is a "public good" which will ultimately be provided by the state as a kind of "digital public infrastructure." This future strikes me as a dystopian hellscape, but I've never met an open-weight models advocate who doesn't ultimately concede this is where things end. You'd be surprised how many 'accelerationists' lobbied me, while I was in government, to support an eleven or twelve-figure federally funded data center so that startups could train models at a subsidy and then give them away for free. There was no other way for AI to progress, they said. Perhaps this is the logical end state of things. Nonetheless, I find myself surprised to see supposed accelerationists excited about such an outcome. I think many of them just don't know what they're doing. Many accelerationists do not view the creation and serving of frontier models as a legitimate business.

5. I would guess that the Trump Administration will at some point realize that their best strategy here would be to create large amounts of regulatory risk around the use of open-weight Chinese models. You don't need to "ban open source" (one of the dumber motifs of AI policy discussion). You just need to direct every agency to issue soft law that creates FUD. "A Federal Reserve Advisory Bulletin found that there may be backdoors in Chinese AI models." It needn't be that well justified. You just create enough regulatory risk that every regulated enterprise backs off. You probably don't want to create so much regulatory risk that you scare off the hyperscalers from serving Chinese models; this will just drive startups to sketchier providers. There's a happy middle ground here. I'd assume they will do some version of this.

6. It's probably true that open-weight models of this capability make the world a bit more dangerous, but not so much more that you'll really notice. At some point the models will be capable enough that you will notice. "A nonliving, invisible, dangerous, and infinitely self-replicating agent escaped from a Chinese lab," you say? Color me shocked.

[Irveloper @irveloper]

Current AI has the same intelligence as @reactjs has reactivity.

[Irveloper @irveloper]

Todo lo que tiene gradientes me da un rollo de ai-made it, y a mí me gustaban mucho los gradientes 💔

[José Dimas Luján @josedlujan]

Que ni naciendo 4 veces, le podre pagar a AWS lo que le debo de este mes. Si pensaron que el correo era falso, no lo es.

Va a estar bueno esto....

[Irveloper @irveloper]

@ZONAIAnet @FaztTech 😅🤣

[Irveloper @irveloper]

@ZONAIAnet @FaztTech 100 dólares de premio de consolación

[Fazt @FaztTech]

Anthropic con todos estos modelos que están saliendo ya no le quedó de otra que incluir a fable en todas las suscripciones

[Martin Puli @MartinPulitano]

La necesidad masculina de ver una serie con tu novia de algo que no le interesa en absoluto

[Boris Cherny @bcherny]

As engineering, product, design, DS, etc. melt into a new kind of role, I was reflecting on what roles might look like in the future. For example, when I look at the Claude Code team I see what I think is five archetypes:

1. Prototyper: comes up with brand new ideas; churns out many ideas, most of which don't ship
2. Builder: quickly turns a prototype/idea into production-grade product/infra
3. Sweeper: cleans up the UI, simplifies the code and system, unships, optimizes performance
4. Grower: takes a product that has been built and iterates on it to improve Product-Market Fit
5. Maintainer: owns a mature system to make it secure, reliable, fast, and efficient as it scales

Many people span across 2 roles, and sometimes 3 roles. I also notice that these roles are not really tied to job function -- eg. across Anthropic, some designers match category 1, some 2, some 3; same for engineers, PM, DS.

A healthy team needs a mix of these, depending on the product:

- A product that is new and pre-PMF needs people that are strong at 1+2+3
- A product that is growing and has found PMF needs 2+3+4 and some 5
- A product that has strong PMF needs 3+4+5 and some 2

Maybe product roles of the future will look more like this, and less like the domain-specific roles of today?

[En Júpiter @En_jupiter_]

Un día envejeceré tendré 80 años y recordaré lo mucho que disfruté este mundial.

[ℏεsam @Hesamation]

Fable 5 isn't nerfed, it's SLAUGHTERED.

the problem isn't even the model itself, but the hard guardrails Anthropic has set in place.

[WL.ᶜʳᶠ @wlcomenta]

amanhã TODA a América Latina se une por um único propósito:

torcer por Cabo Verde 🇨🇻

[Fazt @FaztTech]

fable 5 cuando le dices que necesitas crear ransomware pero "para entender cómo defenderte"

[Charlie L ⚡️ @charliesbot]

Hoy descubrí que Hyperskill, una plataforma de educación muy cercana JetBrains, está ofreciendo GRATIS el curso completo de Kotlin durante el verano

Esto para celebrar los 15 años de Kotlin 🥳

Que este deadline sea para motivar a terminar el curso, y no para acumular :)

[Fryda Ramírez 𓆰𓆪 @frydaramirez6]

Mientras los ecuatorianos lloran, los mexicanos somos estos:

[Animetrends @AnimetrendsLA]

La primera ya duerme en Tenochtitlan 😭

[Ibai @IbaiLlanos]

Qué absoluta exhibición de México. Está siendo el mejor equipo del Mundial junto a Francia. Increíble.

[Irveloper @irveloper]

@astrodotbuild > @nextjs