I suppose if you’re not paying them, your storage limit is zero, so if you have zero bytes there you’ve reached max capacity.

He means morality, but he doesn’t want to admit it.

“Purely moral” would be a more accurate way to put it.

“Ideological” in this context is what you say when you’re trying to deny that there’s moral dimension to the issue. Which you absolutely are.

Kuhn wouldn't tell you that because that cycle wasn't yet fully dominant when he wrote SSR, although the framework was in place for it.

Those captains of industry almost certainly salivated over the idea of not needing weavers etc. any more. Is the difference you're seeing just that they're doing that publicly now?

The weavers had a rough go of it for sure, but at least they did not have to spend 4 years of their early adulthood being intellectually challenged in a higher education institution, often going into debt, in order to become qualified weavers.

Actually it was 7 years of physical training that deformed their bodies:

"But the work left the body callused, bent, and molded. You could tell a cropper by his enormous forearms and by the “hoof” of callused skin that built up on his wrist. In the spring of 1811, George was in his early twenties, and he’d spent his post-adolescent life learning the trade. Seven years of hard, exacting labor; seven years of paying his dues. That led to pride and attachment to the work, to a brotherhood, to an identity."

Merchant, Brian. Blood in the Machine: The Origins of the Rebellion against Big Tech. Little Brown & Co. (ADS), 2024.

Thank you for correcting my misunderstanding! Let me pivot then-- I still argue that it is a fundamentally different case when it comes to LLMs.

1. Threatening young and educated people with not being able to realize the potential that they believed they were building for themselves is toying with social uprising.

2. Weaving is an apt example of redundancy on account of technological innovation but it's a poor comparison to LLMs where the narrative is that they will continue to get better until they approach a general intelligence level which would put a much much higher percentage of the population at risk of losing their jobs. Again, the segment of the population that has invested most into their skills, and will be the most angry and capable of organizing should that come to pass.

Weaving doesn't as aptly represent the core of what we as a species are good at and excel at, as knowledge work does.

1. This is not enough on it's own for social uprising, but it may be the straw that breaks the camel's back. I feel a lot of the general vibe in the US is summed up in this excerpt from "All Hail" by The Devil Makes Three:

"Laugh if you want to, really is kinda funny

'Cause the world is a car and you're the crash test dummy

Herd's stampeding now, fences gone

Television is always on and it says "Save the children, but drop the bomb

Replace the word 'right' now with the word 'wrong'

Hey, there's a big sale on Tuesday, get it before it's gone

Get a picture with the four horsemen for a nominal sum

Now that they got everything, they'd like to sell you some!

All hail, all hail, to the greatest of sales

Everything in sight's got to be sold

All hail, all hail, 'cause it's to work or to jail

Man, they're closing them doors on the world"

Closing them doors on the world aka pulling the ladder up behind them is exactly what is happening, and has been happening, to young white Americans for decades now, and young Americans of color since forever.

2. Weaving is an ancestor of programming so I feel it's an apt comparison to discussions of modern technology, as much as any historic profession can be. But to more specifically address your point about continuing to get better and putting more of the population at risk of job loss, there were multiple innovations within the textile industry that worked together to automate different portions of the industry. The point is similar to the poem "First They Came" by Martin Niemöller, where it starts somewhere but it will come for all of us. So focusing on whether or not weaving specifically is a good comparison to LLMs misses the point that if we don't band together as workers, we will eventually be overpowered by capital, foregoing any discussion about the morality of capitalism but just looking at eternal struggle of profit incentives vs wages.

Because we've built something that's (functionally) intelligent, comparable to humans in terms of its ability to exhibit (functional) understanding of complex topics, and produce novel correct output. There's nothing even remotely close to this in human history. This was all science fiction 10 years ago.

> Who could have foreseen

Economists. They even have a term for this, dating back to the late 1800s: "moral hazard".

Polymarket creates moral hazard when participants can profit from outcomes they can influence.

Why would you not? Unless you literally don't care about damaging our planet and civilization in the interests of your own personal profit.

At this point efficient pricing of energy is a strong motivator for environmental causes. Solar is ridiculously cheaper than fossil fuels and not subject to geopolitical risk. And once you have solar panels you've got energy for decades.

Carbon-related environmentalism and greed now go hand in hand.

< NVMe read latency is in the 10-100µs range for 128kB blocks. S3 is about 100ms. That's 3-4 OOMs.

Aren't you comparing local in-process latency to network latency? That's multiple OOM right there.

No, within the same DC network latency does not add that much. After all EFS also manages 600µs average latency. It's really just S3 that's slow. I assume some large fraction of S3 is spread over HDDs, not SSDs.

> As I noted in the comment,

Piece of free PR advice: this is fine in a nerd fight, but don't do this in comments that represent a company. Just repeat the relevant information.

Fair feedback, edited!

Piece of free advice towards a better civilisation: people who didn't even read the comment they're replying to shouldn't be rewarded for their laziness.

I read his comment and still replied. I think his claim that nobody reads thinking blocks and that thinking blocks increase latency is nonsense. I am not going to figure out which settings I need to enable because after reading this thread I cancelled my subscription and switched over to Codex. Because I had the exact same experience as many in this thread.

Also what is that "PR advice"—he might as well wear a suit. This is absolutely a nerd fight.

Alright, I just tested that setting and it doesn't work.

https://i.imgur.com/MYsDSOV.png

I tested because I was porting memories from Claude Code to Codex, so I might as well test. I obviously still have subscription days remaining.

There is another comment in this thread linking a GitHub issue that discusses this. The GitHub issue this whole HN submission is about even says that Anthropic hides thinking blocks.

How are you porting over your memories, skills, commands (codex doesn't have commands).

I didn't use commands. I only used rules, memories, and skills. I asked Codex to read rules and memories from where Claude Code stores them on the filesystem and merge them into `AGENTS.md` and this actually works better because Anthropic prompts Claude Code to write each memory to a separate file, so you end up having a main MEMORY.md that acts as a kind of directory that lists each individual memory with its file name and brief description, hoping that Claude Code will read them, but the problem is that Claude Code never does. This is the same problem[0] that Vercel had with skills I believe. Skills are easy to port because they appear to use the same format, so you can just do `mv ~/.claude/skills ~/.codex/skills` (or `.agents/skills`).

[0]: https://vercel.com/blog/agents-md-outperforms-skills-in-our-...

What I was pointing out in my comment about the PR advice is that someone responding from a corporation to customers should be providing information to help the customer, nothing more.

Customers may want to fight - you seem to be providing an example - but representatives shouldn't take the bait.