@JamesMcDaniel@esrtweet@vkazartsev imagine if, overnight, one company showed up at every con in the world, selling their versions of what everyone else was making, flooding and undercutting. how do you think that would go over
@JamesMcDaniel@esrtweet@vkazartsev who's doing it matters
an indie artist selling prints at a con is a fan, more likely to amplify the original artist than threaten them. and if they ever do, at any significant scale, that's when lawyers get involved.
the companies are at 1000x that scale, conservatively
@glarri@GestaltU given what he says in the rest of the post, doesn't it make sense to read "good" here charitably, as "good relative to what the system can measure and values"
@JamesMcDaniel@esrtweet@vkazartsev who's doing it matters
A: a person who is being taught not only to copy, but to respect the culture they're learning from, in relationship with peers and teachers, & contribute back to it
B: a company whose legal purpose is "create shareholder value", all else is externalities
@AlexBoudreaux13@rjs@mattpocockuk and we can automate checking for drift between spec and implementation now, more or less the same way we automate test suites
@andy_matuschak@kamens Yeah— there’s the question of whether we could adapt, in theory, and then there’s the question of what outcomes are *likely* given present socioeconomic pressures and the pace of change
The thing I learned this year is that when engineers say they like working on “hard problems”, they actually don't. What they like is puzzle solving, and having a repertoire of patterns that they can pattern match onto traditionally hard problems, usually involving databases or something with scale, etc. And they know that the industry used to pay you a lot for how deep and broad this repertoire was. Unfortunately, in 2026, well, you have a cheat code machine that has infinite breadth and depth for pattern matching. So the question is, do you actually like hard problems? Because there are now hard problems that are a complection of engineering, product, society, culture, politics, and they are fairly intractable, probably unsolvable! Because if you do want to work on those actually hard problems, there is so much money that people will pay you for it. But you’ll have to face that truth about yourself first.
@spencerc99 It's because all these companies are chasing the AI trend, and almost all the models out there are trained as chatbots, so the most natural interface for them, or at least the easiest one, is chat. Jev might mark the beginning of a change here
I love frameworks that divide behavior & personality into categories because of how they help us transcend the idea that there is a right or wrong way to be. 1/
Polya's random walk theorem:
In 1D & 2D, a random walker will return to its starting point with probability 1 given ∞ time.
In 3D, there's a non-zero probability that the walker never returns to the start, even given ∞ time.
A little dimensionality goes a long way