Create bigger assembly than that!
using Cloud based CAD we designed:
- Total parts - 37194
- Total subassemblies - 1120
- Unique parts - 3246
- Unique subassemblies - 341
MadeDrawings: 421
Versions:
356 Bridge
130 Winch
37 Main assembly
#Onshape
@thelcjones Slowly than you think, a lot of what is done in engineering outside software has to be experienced and is not written down so the learning loop is broken here. It will happen just much slower
Dario has written that we need to “pace the frontier,” and Sam has agreed. People may be surprised by my response: go ahead.
You guys are the frontier. By any reasonable metric — market share, revenue growth, model capability — the two of you have a duopoly on frontier intelligence. You’ve also claimed the lead is widening because of recursive self-improvement.
I don’t see what you see in the lab. If the unreleased models are scary enough that you think you should slow down, I support your decision to be responsible.
But stop pretending you need anyone else’s permission. Stop pretending antitrust law has to be suspended so you can form a cartel. Stop pretending you need a regulatory approval process that supersedes product liability. Stop pretending METR is independent when it is intertwined with Anthropic’s investors and staff. Stop pretending you need those same evaluators to police competitors who aren’t even at the frontier.
Most of all, stop pretending the motivation to slow down is purely altruistic. You face massive product-liability exposure if your products enable a truly damaging cyberattack. The market already punishes models that behave in unpredictable or unauthorized ways. After the Hugging Face episode, it is simply good business for OpenAI and Anthropic to trade some raw power for reliability and predictability. Call it alignment if you want. It is also just giving customers what they want.
Pacing the frontier would also create breathing room for a more intelligent conversation about regulation than Bernie Sanders’ “shut it all down.” China is very unlikely to join a global agreement, as you know, and that has to be taken into account as well.
So go ahead and pace the frontier. You are the ones setting it. The easiest way not to build superintelligence is for you to agree not to build it. Demanding your preferred regulatory framework as the price of that will look like blackmail of the public and the political system. So just do it.
If you do, you’ll buy goodwill for the next conversation. If you don’t, we’ll know this was just another bid for regulatory capture — or an election-season psyop.
@Gfilche@bullish1312@johnternus Have you used windows 11? Or any other megaslop software lately?
Last good thing from MS was w7
They are still relevant and generating cashflow from corporations as they are used there but none of the small and nimble use MS and will not in future
I wouldn’t call that positive
Old person musing. I went for a walk with my three year old grand daughter this morning and in addition to all the farm animals, we saw a rabbit, a deer and loads of butterflies and she was constantly amazed. And my God, I was so so happy.
@Sweetcan454@271k_only So the question was why can’t I use it on fixed size array?
The absolute autistic German answer was
“Why would you check the size of an array if you declared it?”
Haven’t occurred in his mind that you could easy up your code by using one function for multiple arrays and check
@Sweetcan454@271k_only I do PLC programming and Germans have one of the most common platforms, they have a function that returns the size of a table/array BUT only if it is a variable size, I got surprised why I can’t use it on fixed size arrays and on a forum some guy had the same issue (1/2)
I renew my appeal for an end to the ongoing violence against the Palestinian civilian population in the West Bank, and I urgently call on the international community to work toward advancing the two-state solution, for a just and lasting peace.