Where in the article does it make that claim?

If you're talking about the implication in the headline, I took it as a brag about having a very large pipeline to mint new billionaires, possibly the largest. As in it doesn't matter. They're not wrong.

From the other end, being the destination for a bunch of rich people moving in doesn't really mean shit. My experience from the New England area is that being the place a bunch of rich people from out of state move to just fucks with property taxes and home prices. I mean they're moving there to get away from where they made their money keep more of what they have to themselves, that's sort of the point. I just don't think that's a controversial viewpoint from a place where rich people like to retire to, no matter what side of the aisle you're on.

The other party will promptly run on undoing it again. Is there a joke in there I'm missing, because it's really pretty sad.

Affordable Care Act required everyone working that can afford it to pay for health insurance, which is one way to lower insurance premiums - everyone pays in instead of waiting till something is wrong or they're older. Republicans gutted that part, but left in the parts that required dependent coverage for young adult children and maternity and prenatal care, preexisting conditions etc. That's good and all, but you still need healthy people paying in, insurance doesn't work if you wait until you need it to buy it. Republicans still want to keep the insurance middleman, but .. they don't really have any sort of plan past that, so they just fucked with ACA where they could, and stopped talking about it after .. how long has it been? I'm not sure what the plan is now, save money you poors, you're on your own? Bragging about the best healthcare in the world, well, shouldn't that be more expensive almost by definition then, so I guess the lower classes being unable to afford it was part of the plan all along? That's a sick joke man.

The whole country's GDP growth last year was basically carried by AI. So...

That's not a joke.

You're trying to pin all the loss and destruction of property on the meltdown and forgetting the massive earthquake and tsunami?

People lose everything here to things like flooding and wildfires and tornados, a nuclear reactor down the road doesn't even move the needle as far as your risk of losing everything or how shitty or impossible it is to rebuild. Jesus man, people lose everything to shit like medical debt here, a car crash, anything can start that shitstorm. To be worried about a meltdown???

Like if all your worldly possessions are reduced to ash, "and the ground underneath it was poisoned" is not even a measurable amount of suck against the tall pile of suck that already is. You're rebuilding somewhere else, if you even can, and that will be a very sad story, but a nuclear reactor didn't do that. That's basically how natural disasters go.

Can they factor a number larger than 21 with QC yet?

It isn't just bullshit on that end, it's bullshit on the expense end. Most businesses are on $20/user/month plans, some individuals maybe on $100/$200

Where the fuck is $2000/month/user coming from? FTA:

Uh huh. Where did those come from. Ticking off every AI upgrade option from every SaaS product you rent, AI summaries of AI summaries of AI code reviews everywhere? I don't think THAT even gets you to $2000 a user. Can you burn $2000 if you try, absolutely, is there a story there... well if we don't know the story explaining that then there isn't a story, this is just a bullshit narrative being built.

Look, somewhere an employee made off with an entire months supply of free breakfast bars and coffee pods from the supply closet. Let's not run around with the coffee is costing companies $X based on that bullshit. Or "On-prem datacenters send power bills skyrocketing" when the story is about some VMware servers showing up in a random office closet. How you unexpectedly blew $2000 at work would be a story.

There's something off about cheering on another man laying a little pipe. Like we're patting a special kid on the back. We knew you could do it Elon Shortpipe, keep it hanging!

You joke, we still can't cut down an oak tree without preapproval and paying for each inch of girth. Don't mess with Texas doesn't mean shit anywhere you like in Texas, you have to bribe some guys up top first.

God bless you comrade for signing up to colonize Mars, the Earth is better for people like you. Would you like any help packing?

For things people will live in or on or around, yes, yes it is.

Yah, that was the GP's problem though, the parent is right, if you let one session get too long the context goes off the rails. You're better off curating some .md files, like a README, skill files, etc and being able to start a new session for each task. You could end up paying more tokens for repetitive discovery in each task but you can improve that various ways, like indexing your code, knowledge graphs etc, same stuff YOU would do to make searching a large alien code base more efficient.

That's all best practice _already_, and it's obviously required to drive the process with some control loop too, but you guys acting like this means appending to a single context continuously are so lost. This "loop engineering" (no judgement) is just an automated control loop on top of an already reentrant process.

It's like giving notes to a new coworker, that actually reads your notes. It's a best practice for using a LLM because you shouldn't keep all the important bits in context... your chat history. That gets compacted when you get close to the context window limit. It's more efficient to start a new one for each task, depending on complexity. You write the important parts that can't be inferred well in basically README files, each new session reads those to get up to speed.

You'd have different workflows for a seasoned salty team, new hires, and seasonal temps that might come and go any day right? Totally different training and documentation needs for each. Treating LLM like a temp that shows up to do one moderately complex task works well, they can infer a LOT, and fast, and LLM don't have memory, they're a function you pass a blob of text to. IDK if I'm explaining this well, play with them a while and you'll get the hang of it.

Well, yes. A currency has value because a bunch of things are priced and negotiated in it. You have a bajlion sellers of a loaf of bread guessing what buyers might pay, and you have a metric schiznillion bread buyers bidding with their wallets and you wind up at an average price of 2 Cronats per load of bread. You repeat that with a bunch of global commodities and you have some benchmarks to say 1 Cronat should be worth about 1.3 Bahlsax, then you have currency markets where people buy and sell each and things sort of settle out somewhere. The numbers don't matter, that whole entire process is what gives currency value, or what lets you measure it against other things of value.

Bitcoin is sort of like a currency ... that nobody buys anything with. Other currency? Which makes it a lot more like the bread. At the end of the day, people are buying things like bread, and they buy it with Cronats and Baglsax, then they can buy bitcoin with one of those, but why? We know why they buy bread.

Blamed for a global logistics reset following COVID, Federal Reserve policy changes, and then Putin's 2022 invasion of Ukraine fucking over global energy prices, with those dumbass "I did that" stickers on gas pumps.

THAT is what you call a "pass", are you fucking joking? In contrast to Trump, what, you think unfairly being blamed for personally fucking over global trade and energy prices with his tariff bullshit then his Iran war? Doing his damndest to manipulate the Fed?

Pass whatever you are smoking please, holy shit dude.