hansmayer

6 ms·

1.
by hansmayer 1mo ago
> What difference does it make to me It's the scale that matters as first, and secondly, most people don't shred their books after reading them once or twice. This is just beyond words.
2.
by hansmayer 2mo ago
> Excluding But you don´t get to to that. Would be like "Excluding my business costs, my company profits are the same as my revenue".
3.
by hansmayer 2mo ago
Folks, not EVERYTHING needs to be LLMs!
4.
by hansmayer 2mo ago
> I guarantee How do you guarantee it, exactly? AI told you in an authoritative tone?
5.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
So no one got it right? Myself, tech outlets, non-tech outlets, everyone on twitter, etc?
6.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
Oh, basic counting is now arithmetic? But I was told they were superintelligent and were going to cause an apocalypse because they can do pretty much everything ? Somehow because they can excrement a lot of text, we were told they can do ev
7.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
> Anthropic has generated far more than 5B in revenue A sworn affidavit by the Anthropic CFO from Dec. 2025 is what you need to look up mate.
8.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
> weird prior assumption to make No, at this level of capital involved, and so much opacity around the company financials, it's a perfectly reasonable assumption.
9.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
> You can also tell the LLM exactly what You can - but it's not advisable, not in the least.
10.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
Oh really? How about the king of non-tech-outlets and digestible, shallow bites for the not-reading-books-middle-class, the Business Insider? https://www.businessinsider.com/uber-coo-andrew-macdonald-ai... You know their bu
11.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
> 10x revenue growth per year To the stunning tune of 5B in the lifetime . > You think enterprises are adopting CC because they think "oh this will replace my SWEs I can fire them"? Yeah, that's actually Darios main t
12.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
> 1T company plans to IPO and their leader has been loudly committing an insane amount of fraud? Ever heard of Enron, Theranos, SBX ? They were all hiding in plain sight - who could've thought they were frauds?
13.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
Read the other comment in the thread. Your buddy literally confirmed exactly what I wrote.
14.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
Why puzzled ? I literally said "According to Ed Zitron", implying that's where I stumbled upon the article. I've no time to read corporate media, at least not regularly.
15.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
I don't have to try at all - I think anyone who spent as much as an internship, let alone years at a modern tech corp would have no trouble distilling the absolutely clear message - we are spending too much for too little value. And ac
16.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
Haven't you heard - these days they just throw slop generated by LLM agents over to other LLM agents which cosplay as internal QA. They know it works because they write really strict .MD files where they instruct agents in English lang
17.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
> Their revenue has quadrupled in just a few months Maybe, maybe not. We haven't seen that S-1 yet. All we have is the 5B in lifetime so far. PLUS - revenue quadrupled or not, it only matters if their costs did not expand at the sam
18.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
In the meanwhile, Google AI search still says the next year after 2026 will be 2028.
19.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
Mate, for 5 years I've been hearing that crap. I am not predicting anything / on the contrary the AI boosting bunch is. When are your predictions coming true?
20.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
> Timescales are hard for anyone to predict Indeed. That's why serious people are very careful, even if they are not running a company supposedly worth 1T USD > He is forced to do these predictions to know how much compute to buy
21.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
The source was the article in the WSJ itself, which then referred to their source at the Anthropic. Which kind of is a textbook definition of "leak". Because otherwise Anthropic would have their lawyers hunting both the employee b
22.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
Ah yes, December 2025...such a long, long time ago...
23.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
Yes, but that's irrelevant, because the COO uses that to base his core argument - that all that jackshit 1800 code changes per week that the CTO boasts about, mean absolutely nothing in terms of value. It means they are spending a lot
24.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
> I welcome you to also hold yourself accountable in the coming months if this trend continues. ;) My company did not swallow hundreds of billions in shady investment deals and is not publicly traded. We work with real money, and the re
25.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
Reasonable things? He said the same shit over and over over the last several years. Yes, lets hold him accountable - you don't make such "oopsies" accidentally, several times in a row.
26.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
> So, unsourced vibes from a shady guy whose entire empire is built on being against AI? Actually he provides sources when he analyses stuff and imho much better than the usual corporate "Sam Altman says we should ask ChatGPT how to
27.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
That "one" person is the COO of Uber. And the other one - the one based on whose statement about burning through yearly AI budget in the first few months - the whole discussion sprung up internally at Uber in the first place is th
28.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
No, he said exactly that, if you remove the corporate sanitised language designed to not offend the Uber CTO.
29.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
Their CEO claims a lot of wild shit. He claimed in January this year, that in about 2-3 weeks from this moment, i.e. "in 6 months" that AI will be doing all of SWE work. Lets hold these people accountable for a change!
30.
by hansmayer 4mo ago
? What are you talking about mate? The man all but says "this shit does not work for us". It iss layered in that careful, sanitised corporate shit-sandwich communication approach, where you take a nice piece of shit and layer it

More ›