Sean Goedecke Today

System One models like Jev can train their own replacements

“System One” models like Jev are fast general classifiers. Classifiers have existed since 1958 , but they have to be trained for specific tasks: if you build a classifier to identify images of dogs, it can’t be used to tell you if a streetlight is red, or if a letter is urgent. Like a LLM, Jev can be prompted for a wide variety of tasks, from sorting email to playing Doom . I think models like this are going to be important. There are many tasks that a LLM could do in theory but are too slow and expensive in practice (for instance, reading each new message in Slack 1 and deciding whether to notify you or not). While you could train a specific classifier for these tasks, there are two main problems with that: Jev obviously solves the first problem. Any engineering team can plug in a System One model with a prompt like “Based on {list of criteria}, should the user be notified about this message?” But I think it solves the second problem too. For serious work, a specific hand-built classifier will always be cheaper and faster than Jev. Generic classifiers have to encode knowledge of all kinds of irrelevant things in their weights, so they can address lots of different tasks. That makes them larger, slower, and more expensive to run. Fortunately, it is going to be surprisingly easy to replace a Jev instance with a hand-built classifier. Once you’re satisfied with how your Jev classifier is performing — presumably you’ve spent days tweaking the prompt — you can trivially collect its input and output data. In the Slack notifier case, that’d be the Slack message (plus any context) and the ultimate decision to notify or not. Once you’ve saved enough data, you’ll be able to train your own classifier on that data 2 . It won’t be a general classifier like Jev, but it should do well on the specific task and be much faster. Of course it’ll require some ML expertise, but it should be easier to develop (or rent) that expertise once you’ve validated that the feature is worth building. In other words, because Jev has to be prompted for specific tasks, it should be easy to distil any successful Jev usage into a specific classifier. If System One models take off — and I hope they do — I expect this to be a common pattern. As I write this, I’m imagining ways you could poll and batch to do this with LLMs. Substitute “instantly notify” or some higher-volume event source if you’d prefer a different example. You could annotate a bunch of data with LLMs already, without using Jev, but this is a pretty expensive step to take when you aren’t sure the feature is going to work. Despite being a well-understood ML problem, training a bespoke classifier is outside of the skillset of most ordinary engineering teams Training a classifier requires assembling a large dataset As I write this, I’m imagining ways you could poll and batch to do this with LLMs. Substitute “instantly notify” or some higher-volume event source if you’d prefer a different example. ↩ You could annotate a bunch of data with LLMs already, without using Jev, but this is a pretty expensive step to take when you aren’t sure the feature is going to work. ↩

AI Programming Machine Learning

▲ 0

0 views

Sean Goedecke Today

Grit your teeth and ship it

Being good at building and being good at shipping are two separate skills. In the short term, they’re actually countervailing: if you have a gift for building, you’re likely to be worse at shipping. Ira Glass has a classic quote about this. All of us who do creative work, we get into it because we have good taste. But there is this gap. For the first couple years you make stuff, it’s just not that good. It’s trying to be good, it has potential, but it’s not. But your taste, the thing that got you into the game, is still killer. And your taste is why your work disappoints you. The only way around this is to grit your teeth and ship it . You have to force yourself to publish things you’ve made even when you think they’re crap. Gifted programmers have a nearly pathological desire to build elegant, correct, neat systems. That’s what motivates them to learn the arcane details of their languages, or to spend time polishing and refactoring over and over again. But it’s also what makes them reluctant to ship. Any flaws in the software bother them on an emotional level. If they ship with those flaws, they feel like people will think they weren’t paying enough attention to notice them, or that they weren’t good enough to fix them. This is annoying when you’re writing software on your own, but it’s completely fatal when you’re working in a tech company. Any large software system is covered in flaws, whether due to time pressure, relative inexperience , wicked features , or a hundred other reasons. Working with it is a process of compromise: of finding the best possible solution given the quirks and foibles of the codebase. In fact, since the most important thing in large codebases is consistency , the right thing to do is sometimes to duplicate flaws, assuming they’re not catastrophic. Gifted programmers often freeze up. I’ve often seen them retreat to smaller domains where they can safely make the code “correct”: tweaking dev-environment setup, or refactoring tests. Sometimes they just do nothing, and spin in shame and guilt (plus the compounding shame of not achieving anything) until they implode and quit. If they had worse taste, they wouldn’t be as good at programming, but they’d be a lot more useful. You can typically improve a bad diff with time and effort. You can’t improve no diff. I have a sensitive eye for awkward sentences and uneven prose. That can make writing an unpleasant process: I know what I’m trying to say, but I can’t seem to say it in a way that’s as clear and as elegant as I know is possible. More than half the time I finish drafting a blog post, I look at the post and don’t think it’s very good. But I (mostly) grit my teeth and publish it anyway, because you have to bias towards shipping . Like any skill, shipping gets easier the more you practice it. If I don’t publish a blog post for a month, I always feel like the next draft is too poorly-written or uninteresting to put out there. But when I’m publishing a post per day, I typically feel great about each draft. When I go back and read my old posts, I can’t tell which ones I felt good about and which ones I felt bad about. There’s no correlation between that and the posts that become popular . Here are some posts I didn’t like as I was writing them but that resonated with my audience: Here are some posts I thought were pretty good but that didn’t find popularity: You just can’t predict what people will find interesting or useful. Producing a high volume of work thus gives much better yield than a small amount of highly-polished work. It can be disheartening to realize that some of your most casual, throwaway work will be more successful than the work you slaved over 1 . Specifically, it’s disheartening because it means realizing you don’t have control over your own success. You can’t produce something successful by focusing on a single piece until you’re satisfied it’s great. Instead, you just have to do a lot of things and see what sticks. You have to be momentum-based , not outcome-based. In other words, you have to grit your teeth and ship it . One common reason to write less is getting overly precious about your ideas. If you think you’ve got a really compelling concept, you don’t want to “waste it” on a poorly-written story. But in fact you can just write about the same thing over and over until you get it right! I have written like thirty blog posts about shipping (this is one of them), or about how tech companies work, or about how internal emotional regulation is as important as technical ability. I expect to continue writing and thinking about these ideas for as long as I find them interesting. Anthony Burgess famously claimed to have “knocked off” A Clockwork Orange in three weeks, and Arthur Conan Doyle considered his largely-forgotten historical novel Sir Nigel to be far better than his Sherlock Holmes stories. Do the simplest thing that could possibly work Software engineering may no longer be a lifetime career Software engineers should be a little bit cynical Weak engineering managers Paths through the space of all possible solutions Trying to impress people you don’t respect Anthony Burgess famously claimed to have “knocked off” A Clockwork Orange in three weeks, and Arthur Conan Doyle considered his largely-forgotten historical novel Sir Nigel to be far better than his Sherlock Holmes stories. ↩

Programming

▲ 0

0 views

Kev Quirk Yesterday

2026-09-19 22:28: Watched Forrest Gump for the first time in 20 odd years this evening. Watching it...

Watched Forrest Gump for the first time in 20 odd years this evening. Watching it again with an adult brain...Jenny is a real bitch! Thanks for reading this post via RSS. RSS is ace, and so are you. ❤️ You can reply to this post by email , or leave a comment .

Entertainment Movies

▲ 0

0 views

Gabriel Weinberg Yesterday

The AI “Game Over” Kickstarter

I’m advising this new Kickstarter that you should check out if you care about AI risks and regulation. My AI posts over the last couple of years have advocated for taking AI risks seriously by enacting strong AI regulation, especially to mitigate the potential of significant job market disruption. If that resonates with you, then this project should too. It will create a microsite game titled GAME OVER to help people better understand AI risks. I’ve been advising the parent organization, School of Thought , for over a decade, who are focused generally on increasing critical thinking in society and have a particular knack for making viral educational microsites. Most recently they made a similar site on conspiracy theories , which you can use to get a sense of how it might be adapted for AI risks. And of course there is a lot more info on the Kickstarter page itself . (Their pages on biases and fallacies are also great.) This new project was obviously in the works well before the recent news cycle on AI existential risks. The School of Thought’s approach here offers the potential to inject critical thinking about AI risks into the mainstream, which is clearly needed right now. Please join me in supporting the project .

AI

▲ 0

0 views

Unsung Yesterday

“I love it because it’s a bit messy, and not everything lines up perfectly.”

Completely unrelated to software, but sometimes stepping outside is what’s needed to develop perspective and find creative solutions – this is Practical Engineering’s video about the many electrical plugs and sockets in America : = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/i-love-it-because-its-a-bit-messy-and-not-everything-lines-up-perfectly/yt1-play.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/i-love-it-because-its-a-bit-messy-and-not-everything-lines-up-perfectly/yt1-play.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> There are a lot more socket kinds than I expected, and sprinkled in between are some useful observations about system design, change management, power users, backwards compatibility, and consistency vs. inconsistency – in my head, that last part puts this video right next to the previous post in my brain, even if they seem nothing alike. Also, that early video snippet from the 1920s? Jesus Christ. What a UI.

Design Culture

▲ 0

0 views

Eli Bendersky's website Yesterday

Notes on discrete-time Fourier series and transform

The following are my notes on discrete-time Fourier series (DTFS), as well as the discrete-time Fourier transform (DTFT). These topics serve as an important theoretical underpinning to the digital processing of signals by computers using the DFT (which will be covered in a future post). For discrete-time signals, we use the square bracket notation to denote samples: x[n] is the n-th sample of signal x . We’ll say that a discrete-time (just discrete from this point on, for brevity) signal is periodic with period N if: When talking about continuous-time Fourier series , we started with real trigonometric functions and later moved to complex exponentials. Here, we’ll just go ahead and start directly with (discrete) complex exponentials - converting between the two representations isn’t difficult and can be done as needed (Appendix C in this post demonstrates it). We’ll be dealing with the following family of signals [1] : These are discrete complex exponentials that are periodic with period N. w_0=\frac{2\pi}{N} is the angular frequency . As discussed in Appendix A, there are only N such distinct signals, since: We’ll want to consider the representation of an arbitrary N-periodic x[n] by a linear combination of \phi_k[n] : The notation k=\langle N\rangle means k runs over any sequence of N consecutive integers. Since there are only N distinct signals \phi_k , the order of summation doesn’t matter - as long as all of them are used. So it could go from 0 to N-1 , or from 1 to N , or from 2 to N+1 , and so on. All of these orders will enumerate all distinct \phi_k . Going back to our linear combination: This is the discrete-time Fourier series (DTFS) representation of x[n] and the coefficients a_k are the Fourier series coefficients. Note that there are no convergence issues as in the continuous case, because we’re dealing with a finite sum. To find the coefficients a_k , we’ll proceed in a way that’s somewhat similar to the continuous case. Multiply both sides of the equation above by e^{-ir(2\pi/N)n} and sum over N terms: Interchanging the order of summation on the right-hand side: By Appendix B, the inner sum on the right-hand side is equal to N when N\mid r-k and to 0 otherwise. Without loss of generality - since we iterate over N consecutive values - let’s just assume this happens in our sum when r=k (and therefore r-k=0 , which is an integer multiple of N ). So our equation becomes: To conclude, the Fourier decomposition of a periodic discrete signal x[n] into periodic complex exponentials is: Let’s revisit the triangular function t(x) from the post on Fourier series . Here, we’ll be using the following sampled version: The sampling is done with 12 samples per period of 4. The spacing between two samples is \Delta x=\frac{1}{3} . Another way to express it: Substituting this into the definition of t(x) , we get: We then do an odd extension [2] to the range n=[6..12) , and repeat it with period N=12 . Using considerations similar to the continuous time case , because our function is odd we just need a sine series here: The five terms correspond to the five pairs of nonzero-frequency indices; see Appendix C. And the coefficients are: We can run this sum over half the period, because the terms at and 12-n are equal (both t_d[n] and the sine change signs). Also, the terms at n=0 and n=6 vanish because t_d[0]=t_d[6]=0 : Looking at the values of t_d : We can similarly calculate all b_k until k=5 : The resulting Fourier series is therefore: You can use the following interactive plot to explore this approximation to the discrete triangle function t_d[n] : The dropdown box selects how many of the terms in the series shown above to plot. The orange crosses show where the series’ values at the integer indices are, and the orange line is interpolated to better visualize the sine waves being added. Note that when all the coefficients are used, the DTFS exactly reconstructs the input signal. In the post on the Fourier Transform we’ve seen how non-periodic signals can be represented in the frequency domain by taking the Fourier series and calculating them at the limit L\rightarrow\infty . Here, we’ll do something similar for discrete signals. Suppose we have a non-periodic discrete signal x[n] of finite duration (it’s zero outside a finite range of indices). Here’s a sample plot: The bottom half is x_N[n] - a periodic signal, one period ( N ) of which is equal to x[n] . We choose M large enough that x[n]=0 outside [-M,M] and set N=2M+1 . Since x_N is periodic, we can represent it with DTFS [3] : We’ll use the notation of angular frequency: Now the critical part; since x[n] is zero outside [-M,M] , extending the summation to all integers does not change its value: We’ll define the following continuous function with variable : Then at points w_k : The function X(w) is the discrete-time Fourier transform (DTFT) of x[n] . The inverse DTFT process reconstructs x[n] from X(w) , by substituting a_k back into the DTFS: By our definition of \Delta w , we have: Just like in the continuous case, we recognize the sum as a Riemann sum . Let M\rightarrow\infty . The spacing \Delta w tends to zero, and we can rewrite the sum as an integral: To conclude, the DTFT and inverse DTFT pair are: X(w) is a continuous, periodic function with period 2\pi , because: Therefore, it’s enough to run the integral on any interval of length 2\pi . The DTFS and DTFT are closely related. Starting with a finite-duration signal x[n] , we form a periodic signal by repeating a block of N samples containing it. Its DTFS coefficients are equally spaced, scaled samples of the DTFT: The relation is similar to the one between Fourier series and the Fourier transform in the continuous case. The DTFT also has useful properties similar to the continuous Fourier transform: linearity, time shifting, the convolution theorem etc, but we won’t spend time on them here. Discrete-time complex exponentials have the form e^{iw_0n} where w_0 is the angular frequency . The discrete nature of these functions leads to some interesting outcomes; for example, consider the exponential with angular frequency w_0+2\pi : Therefore, the exponential at w_0+2\pi is exactly the same as the exponential at w_0 . In considering discrete complex exponentials, we need only choose w_0 from a range of length 2\pi . Another interesting aspect of these functions concerns their periodicity. In order for e^{iw_0n} to be periodic with some positive integer period N , the following must hold: In other words: So w_0N itself must be an integral multiple of 2\pi . For some integer k : For a fixed positive integer N , let’s consider all complex exponentials for which N is a period: But earlier we’ve said that all complex exponentials with angular frequencies 2\pi apart are identical. This means that the set above consists of only N distinct exponentials. We can choose any starting k and get distinct signals with k , k+1 , k+2 and so on until k+N-1 . After that, they begin repeating: \phi_N[n]=\phi_0[n] and so on. All of this is very different from the continuous case, where t is a real number. The signals e^{iw_0t} and e^{i(w_0+2\pi)t} agree only at integer values of t , so they are distinct functions of t\in\mathbb{R} . Consequently, for a fixed positive period , the continuous-time exponentials e^{ik(2\pi/T)t} are distinct for every integer k , giving infinitely many distinct signals. Let’s consider the following discrete function, defined by a sum: We’ll want to consider two cases: (1) When k is an integer multiple of N : k=rN for some integer r (for example k=0 , k=N , k=-2N etc.) In this case, the sum becomes: Since both r and are integers, the exponent is an integer multiple of 2\pi i , so: (2) When k is not an integer multiple of N , let’s do a variable change p=n+1 : We can now use the finite sum formula for a geometric progression with the common ratio r=e^{i(2\pi/N)k} ; the sum is: Note that r\neq 1 because k is not an integer multiple of N . However: While these calculations demonstrate the sums from n=0 to N-1 , they work exactly the same for any N consecutive indices, because the summand is periodic in with period N . Therefore: Using the formula for DTFS developed earlier in the post: Recall that t_d[n] is odd over the full range n=[0..12) . Specifically, since the cosine is an even function, we have for any m : Therefore the cosine terms cancel out throughout the period; term 1 is the same as negative term 11, etc. We’re left with the sines: All coefficients are purely imaginary. For convenience, let’s write: Let’s turn back to the Fourier reconstruction formula: And pair up exponentials at k with ones at 12-k : Also, since t_d[n] are real, the conjugate of a_k is: So adding the paired exponentials with their coefficients and using Euler’s formula: We don’t include the terms at k=0 and k=6 , because a_0=a_6=0 (sine of an integral multiple of \pi ).

Programming JavaScript Science Data Analysis

▲ 0

0 views

Unsung Yesterday

CleanShot’s bulldozed settings

In a recent post , Jim Nielsen used the term “bulldozing of an interface”: I’ve found this to be true a lot as of late. Lots of tiny details that were meticulously crafted over years with specific rationales tied to real-world use cases, all completely bulldozed in a giant refactor. I liked that term and a description, but I didn’t expect I’ll put it to use so soon. Unfortunately, mere months after praising CleanShot’s settings , the new version 5 update bulldozed them into something much worse. Let me show you first. In the following screenshots, version 4 design is followed by its version 5 equivalent. Quick recording settings: = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/1.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/1.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/2.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/2.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> General: = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/3.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/3.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/4.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/4.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> Recording: = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/5.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/5.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/6.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/6.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> Advanced: = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/7.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/7.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/8.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/cleanshots-bulldozed-settings/8.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> The other panels follow the same pattern. (The screenshots are from macOS Sequoia, but I checked in Tahoe, and things are not materially different there.) I was taken aback by this – a feeling exacerbated by the fact that the quick settings on a dark background looked even worse – so I shared an early reaction with CleanShot’s support team, and asked how to downgrade to version 4, which luckily remains possible. The support team member said that they actually liked the previous settings themselves, but conveyed they shipped the redesign in order to feel more consistent with the operating system, and more modern. I followed up with a longer response, which I’m sharing below. I am hoping this can be valuable to others facing a similar situation in the future, or give some specific observations to latch onto – for me, it allowed to put in words the feelings I’ve had about the Ventura Settings redesign that were rattling in my brain since 2022: I don’t think you have to follow the OS if its own designers are making bad decisions – I gather it’s even our responsibility as designers not to – and we know they are bad, if only from how people reacted to the macOS Ventura System Settings redesign. Here are the problems I see that CleanShot 5 settings now inherit from Apple: It’s not too late to undo this. This reminds me of city planning in the 1970s , where enchanted by the notions of modernism we remade city downtowns to be all identical-looking, clad in concrete, and surrounded by freeways. We look at it with shame and regret today, realizing we made previously alive places basically inhospitable. You could still keep the modern left nav – that indeed didn’t age well, as screens are wider today – and perhaps left align the version 4 labels to make the gestalt hold better. It’s definitely more work, which I sympathize with; it’s hard when the operating system cedes its responsibilities to provide good design patterns. But you had something really wonderful before, crafted and signposted with care, both a great welcome mat for new CleanShot users and – important here more than for many other apps! – fantastic in repeated use. (I know this is kind of an intense reply and I hope it doesn’t arrive feeling like concentrated condescension. Part of it is that I am x-posting it to my blog, as I believe it might be helpful for other designers.) The two-pane settings layout was originally designed for the first iPhone with its 320px screen width. macOS Settings stretches it to 460px, and in your app you went with 550px. As a result, the settings panes start registering, gestalt-wise, as “left column first, right column second” rather than “first option first, second option second, etc.” This requires eyes to dart around a lot more, as the labels are disconnected from their controls. The shading and lines help, but they’re just a crutch – and they also reduce density. In version 4, your eyes could follow the solitary center spine with more ease. The second column is right-aligned, which makes visual processing harder – not just because it further separates the label from the control, but also right alignment is harder to process in a left-to-right language. (In the previous layout, sure, the labels were right aligned, but they were still near the common spine. Plus, the labels are short and simpler visually than Ventura-style right-aligned UI controls.) This also creates attendant problems, like Options… buttons being on the “wrong side,” or Options… and Choose… buttons needing to be in inconsistent positions. In version 5, every panel looks much more alike. This doesn’t feel like helpful consistency, as it makes it harder to recognize where you are. Version 4 had a nice variety of silhouettes that felt cohesive as a whole, but still allowed for shape coding to help you orient yourself. We’re all pattern matchers, and varying shapes enter our brains on a deeper level, freeing us from having to consciously process the environment (or even read labels) over and over again, slowing us down. Ventura’s settings design does not really allow for radio buttons and struggles with sliders, forcing pop-up buttons for every one-of-many option, which further reduces shape coding, but also is worse for orientation as you can’t see everything – if you just want to find an option like “Plain color” in Wallpaper, it’s no longer immediately visible. You might never, as a matter of fact, learn it’s there. CleanShot 4 really nicely knew when to choose radio buttons and when to reach for pop-up buttons, depending on the importance of the control. (A smaller, but similar argument could be made for subtabs and streamlined checkboxes, both used to a good effect in 4, but missing in 5.) The new layout is also less usable as you can no longer click on long labels next to switches to toggle them, which was possible with checkboxes. The pop-up buttons are more narrow, too. This means you have to be a lot more precise in clicking, which adds up over time. The previous layout had a nice consistent feeling of “things that are actionable and I can click on are white, everything else is gray.” It was yet another way that aided in scannability and orientation. In the new system, pull-down menus look like (inactive) labels. The switches themselves have visibility and contrast problems. This might be particularly prominent in my setup with graphite as the accent color, but I believe it’s not unique to that, as I continue seeing feedback from many people who are always confused about “reading” the switches, whose both states look similar to one another. (The checkbox’s shape doesn’t have that problem.)

Design Dart

▲ 0

0 views

ava's blog Yesterday

internet safety for kids / a love letter to the internet

Content warning: Mention of suicide, grooming methods, child sexual abuse. In between all the social media bans and age-verification discussions, I think back to my online time as a child. My parents' household got internet when I was about 9 years old, and we had a family computer everyone used. At age 12, I got my own PC in my room. What the internet gave me was important and definitely shaped who I am today, for the better even. It offered me a way to journal that was inaccessible to my parent, who was always searching through all my stuff, reading my paper journals, and digging through my trash. Getting access to my PC, and then finding a specific website and logging in there was a big hurdle back then. 1 It gave me a way to connect with others who were also having problems. We could vent to each other about school issues, parental abuse, self-image and more. It was my form of therapy before I could access any care. It helped me gain perspective, feel understood and learn what is and isn't normal behavior from a parent. It was great that I could finally find others I could connect to and help them with their issues as well, when I was mostly a loner at school. Thanks to the internet, there were opportunities to socialize for me that real life couldn't give me - in chats, in forums, via blogging, early social media, or games. It also shaped my political views and values in ways that school or parents simply lacked. My parents aren't very politically literate or in any way academic. There were no intellectual discussions ever at my home. To be quite honest, there weren't any discussions aside from household-centered stuff. School is... school. Surface level, limited by the skills and views of each teacher, very centrist, very mellow, very exam-focused, and very local. Places like Tumblr opened up a whole world full of political discourse for me. I learned so much theory there, was exposed to a lot of discussions, both heated and respectful back-and-forth, walls of text with sources, and a much more of a global view. Following a discussion chain and seeing so many arguments and their proof, just to change my mind with the answer that follows, gave me more than any staged, weird discussion table at school could give, where no one even seriously held any of the views they were forced to read from a paper. I think without discussion culture online back then in forums or places like Tumblr, I wouldn't have learned to write the way I do, which both helped me in school as well as paved the way to write things like the tech utopia fantasy is over . On top of that, it made me a more empathetic and understanding person. I grew up with bigotry; thankfully, my parents weren't outright or proudly racist or xenophobic, but still unknowingly kept using terms that are actually slurs, or said things that were well-meaning or with neutral intentions, but ultimately ignorant and offensive either way. They used to be homophobic, and always had something to point out about someone on TV or on the street; slutshaming, fatphobia, being ignorant of disabled people if it wasn't the stereotypical person in a wheelchair, never trying to understand where the other person might come from or that they have a different experience than them. They always uncritically reproduced some bullshit and saw the worst in people, or saw them as caricatures of themselves. Without the internet, I would have become like them, or stayed that way for far longer at least. The internet gave me a way to push back on these ideas as much as was safe for me to do so, or just keep quiet while having a more favorable and understanding view of people in my head. Slightly related to the former point, but it also helped me with my queerness. When I grew up (and where I grew up), queerness just wasn't discussed. Maybe it came up one day what a gay or lesbian person is, and that's it. It wasn't discussed in sex education, no one at any school I went to was out, we had no queer student couples, no teachers who were openly queer, not even a fellow student where it was known that their parents were queer. Nothing. It was like queer people theoretically existed, but it's irrelevant, or an adult thing, maybe a porn thing. Trans people were not discussed at all when I was growing up. While you can surely list some movies or shows from before 2008 that had some queer character, it weren't popular ones, or many. It wasn't like nowadays, where it feels like most shows or movies have a queer character or multiple, intentionally, with good writing, and not just to add drama, make fun of them or kill them off. Especially kids shows even! When I watched TV, no queer person was seen. Online, I could learn about different sexualities and gender identities without an adult person policing it, restricting or censoring it, deciding what is or isn't "valid", or deciding how "age appropriate" it is. I remember scrolling Autostraddle in 2010/2011 and onwards, which helped me a lot with coming to terms with being a lesbian. It also broadened my interests a lot! I got into games because other people invited me to play, or because I saw fanart or screenshots of the game that I liked. Sometimes I saw people all reading, watching or playing the same thing just after it released, liveblogging their experience, and it made me wanna get in on that and bond with people about it. Tumblr is the reason I got into Dragon Age and Mass Effect, for example, and I still love them today. Same with trying other hobbies, like photography, or 3D modeling, and digital drawing. Seeing people online do them not only made me aware they exist or is something I could do, but they were also encouraging others to try, and had helpful guides at hand or even made them. These are the top things on my mind when I think about how the internet shaped me positively. There are many, many more I could list. I want to acknowledge that the internet has changed since then, and there are new challenges that I never had to deal with. But it doesn't mean that I didn't have my fair share of problems that still exist today, and that are often used together with addiction and other issues to justify a ban. When I grew up with the internet, there were very few, basically no resources on how to help kids with it or how to prepare them for it. We were the trial generation, I guess. No one knew better, or knew of the potential dangers much. I remember that some time, it made the news that kids were groomed on the platform Knuddels , and that parents should make sure their kids stay away. What did this lead to? I was told Knuddels was a bad website, and I was forbidden from using it. That's it. And of course, to never give out my address or real name. My peers got the same short talk. The result was that Knuddels was very interesting to them because it was forbidden and dangerous. I didn't participate, but only because my child mind heard " The website is bad and dangerous. " and thought that if I went on it, the police would come to my house and arrest me, or some stranger would instantly know where I live and come to my house and kidnap me. What would have been better for my peers and me? An explanation of why this website is bad. What are groomers or pedophiles? What do they want to do to me? Why is that bad? What might they use or say to convince me to send pictures, or give out my address, or meet with me? When someone says these things to me, I should notify a trusted adult and stop responding. What can I do if I send something and regret it? What if they start blackmailing me with it? Know that you will not get in trouble for telling anyone what happened to you, even if you think it's your fault. Instead of having these conversations, parents and news chose the easy path and just designated a website the bad spot. This didn't save me from groomers everywhere else. There were the adult men who noticed I was vulnerable because I was extremely young (12-16) and abused by my parents, and listened to my problems, reassured me, played friend, just to slowly shift the conversation towards their own "problems". The lack of sex they had (with or without partner), and what they could do to get more sex, or how lonely they felt. They'd first discuss their sex life, and then pry about yours. Did you already masturbate? How did it feel? And as a very young girl feeling unloved and growing up oversexualized in our society, you slowly learn that sexualizing yourself and trying to be sexually available or interesting to people will earn you love, attention, and care, especially when you otherwise don't get it. And if the price for reassuring conversations with an older friend is that... you pay. And they always say they will feel better if you send them a picture. Just of your face at first. Then more. And if you said no, they'd act hurt. They'd either remind you that they listened to all your problems so you better do as they say else it's "unfair" and you were "just using them", or they outright threaten to kill themselves. This didn't only happen once. It happened with multiple men, different ages, in slightly different ways, and almost everyone I know has a similar story, especially when they are women. What I would have needed to hear as a child or teen in these cases, before any of it happened, would have been: Why is it so hard to have these conversations and teach children and teens that? Why do we once again try to paint with a broad brush about how this or that game or platform is bad, but we don't actually do everything in our power to demand that these platforms are improved not just for kids and teens, but for everyone? Why don't we still not put a lot of time and effort into helping kids and teens spot predators, scams, propaganda, manipulated content, ragebait, purposefully addictive content and the like? Why can we not teach them how to be responsible with porn and how to judge its content? How are we still not really discussing safe sexting when we know teens will do it? How are we still so behind on teaching them about privacy, data protection, and how their data will be used? We don't give children and teens enough competency, media literacy and knowledge to decide for themselves and truly understand the consequences, and then watch them bumble around cluelessly or be preyed on, and use that as an excuse to take away their agency and rights. Age changes absolutely nothing about these platforms or the risk of falling prey to someone or something. Becoming older doesn't automatically flip a switch and enables the knowledge on how to properly assess your screen time and your media habits or tastes and take the appropriate action. It doesn't automatically teach you when something is wrong and what to do. It doesn't immediately give you good media literacy. It doesn't just install good habits around online sexuality and porn. It doesn't safeguard you from emotionally manipulative content, effects of advertising, false promises of influencers, and how to spot unattainable beauty standards. It doesn't protect you from love scams or being blackmailed with nudes. If you are not taught about these things, and are shielded from the danger until you are 16-18, you will just make these experiences later, with absolutely no support. The same things that harm kids harm adults! The same stuff kids fall for, your grandma falls for too! Social media bans and severe age restrictions and verification enables everyone to shrug and throw their hands up as if they had no clue on how to help this. Platform owners can continue their platforms as before with no changes needed, which is great for them because things like engagement metrics, infinite scroll, ragebait, and the like keep the platform afloat and they don't have to adjust their predatory and unethical business model. Parents and schools are allowed to bury their heads in the sand, shifting blame between each other as both parties are too stressed, overwhelmed and have no time to deal with this. Giving into all of this with bans and handing over sensitive data to companies selling to data brokers is a declaration of bankruptcy of our willingness to raise children to be capable and responsible adults with the necessary freedoms and support. You are abandoning and neglecting your children. I read the Datenschutzberater , a magazine dedicated to data protection law in Germany. In the edition DSB-07-08/2026, in her article " Neue Anforderungen an den Kinderdatenschutz - Praxisfolgen aktueller Behördenpositionen ", author Anna-Lena Eswein explains the current state of child data protection law and uses a fictional example of a child-friendly app to illustrate them. One feature of this fictional app is: Specific presets for minor accounts. A private profile, the inability to be found via search or recommended profiles, comments and DMs are only possible with pre-approved contacts. Changes to these settings require a "conscious decision". The author doesn't write that, but I assume this decision needs to be made by the parent, or at least with parental approval. I think approaches like these are highly problematic! This restricts online interactions to merely real life connections, approved by their parents, exchanged in person. Likely just accounts by family members, some people from school, and of the club(s) the child is in, and that's it. That is not enough! Referencing back to what I wrote above about what the internet gave me, the ability to interact with people all over the world gave me so much. The option to seek out whomever I wanted, or be approached by people with similar interests, was important. I needed a space online where I could be visible to others, showcase me and my interests, explore how I wanted to act and present myself, and where I could talk about my problems removed from the watchful eye of parents or real life peers that didn't understand me. I had contact with much older adults in forums that was helpful, kind, respectful, informative and helped me grow, like another parental figure or an online aunt or uncle. I am still very grateful for them. If my mother would have had the option to control my online life like parents nowadays have, it would have shielded me so much from good and necessary online content and interactions, and would have purposefully prevented me from speaking about my abuse to others online. She would have been even more successful in separating myself from others and being able to gaslight me about her behavior and what is normal in a family. It would have reduced my online presence to a second channel for abuse and limited real life connections, plus maybe a feed (algorithmic or not) that merely makes me a silent spectator and consumer to whatever is on it (maybe even pre-approved, too). How are queer kids supposed to find each other like this, when not every area, every school, is safe in real life or where not everyone is visibly out? How are disabled or neurodivergent kids find each other, when they are often one of the only ones in their class or school, and want to speak to someone they can relate to? We can't make up for social contact with some TV shows or infographics or watching a YouTube video about it. How are teens supposed to learn about sexuality or politics or the genocide in Gaza when their feed is scrubbed clean and their parents will instantly find out if they recently searched "gay sex" in the app search? Everything will instantly be a shameful conversation brought up at the next dinner before the child is even ready to bring it up themselves. Yes, a setup like this during my time as a teen would have meant those men would have never found or contacted me. But it would have stolen far more from me; my safe space, my therapy, my online friends, my education and my interests. My negative online experiences were completely preventable without taking away the good, or running 24/7 surveillance on all my devices. It would have just been more effort, and would have required adults to talk to me, and treat me like an autonomous human being who can learn and make good decisions, instead of a sentient pet rock that doesn't have any rights. I would never, ever trade in the good to avoid the bad. I would have rather gone through the bad than miss out on the person the good parts made me. The bad has never been more preventable while still allowing kids and teens their own spaces and platforms for emotional support, to explore who they are, and learn more than their parents and school teach them. Without bans or age verification. It requires educational resources, time and willingness to sit down and discuss, humanizing children and teens and hearing them out, and holding platforms accountable for the bad they level against all of us , not just children. The sad reason the latter doesn't happen is because the EU has made itself so reliant on US tech that any real threat or consequences to US platforms has become a burden too great to bare. And they'd rather give the fascist US empire more money and install more surveillance and control over us all than actually give a fuck about your children. Children and teen's isolation and loss of resources, spaces and friendships is an okay price to pay for these fossils and their addiction to Microslop. Fuck them! Published 19 Sep, 2026 When I think about what tools parents have nowadays to control their child - live tracking, a report on everything the child did on a device, access to all accounts and DMs, a camera in the child's room... I get sick to my stomach. That tech was made for parents like mine, and there are reasons why they will die alone. ↩ When they see a picture of you and tell you you seem much older, or say the way you write is so mature for your age, it's not a compliment. They want you to feel flattered and like you are special for deserving adult attention, but they say it to hook you. They are also lying to themselves about how you don't "really count as a child" when it's total bullshit. No adult needs a child friend. No adult needs to cry on a child's shoulder. They have other adult friends and their own parents and other resources to help them out. They only say these things so you will feel bad for them and not cut contact, or do as they say. They use your sympathy and willingness to help against you. They will not kill themselves. They just threaten that so you comply. If you are not sure or concerned, call the police on them. When you take the pictures and videos they ask of you, or do things in front of a webcam in a video call, you are producing child sexual abuse material. That's not only illegal, but this will haunt you, and be traded between the perpetrators forever. When I think about what tools parents have nowadays to control their child - live tracking, a report on everything the child did on a device, access to all accounts and DMs, a camera in the child's room... I get sick to my stomach. That tech was made for parents like mine, and there are reasons why they will die alone. ↩

Culture AI Programming

▲ 0

0 views

Karboosx Yesterday

We still don't know what consciousness is

People keep saying LLMs are reaching AGI or consciousness, but it's hard to claim that when we don't even know what consciousness actually is. How can we measure something if we haven't defined it?

Science AI

▲ 0

0 views

Brain Baking Yesterday

KTConf 2026 Creative Coding Slides

Yesterday, I had the pleasure to give a talk for the local Kotlin community on creativity in software engineering and the impact generative AI has on our ability to be creative. KTConf took place in an iconic venue, the M museum in Leuven, so I felt obliged to include a slide about a painting. To my dismay, nobody in the room knew anything about art history or could identify the painting (Manet’s Bundle of Asparagus ). That allowed me to demonstrate you’ll likely find something like Manet’s painting very creative if some expert tells you it is. In the context of coding, the same concepts apply: you’ll need to have some technical background in order to judge whether something is creative—during both the process (the code) and the end product (the thing that hopefully makes your end users happy). Thus, technical knowledge is one of the prerequisites for being a creative programmer. The talk, entitled A Critique On AI-Assisted ‘Creative’ Programming , predictably included a summary of my book The Creative Programmer . Here’s the executive summary of the talk: Nobody will dispute that creativity is essential to being a successful programmer. With the rise of LLM systems, we lazy coders are even more allured to take the shortcut and by handing out the most mundane aspects of our everyday jobs. Yet what we do not know is that by doing so, we are also seriously hampering our happy, silly, and joyful side of programming, or in other words, the creative aspects of programming. In this talk, we’ll explore why AI-assisted tools are not beneficial but detrimental to our creative side—that very side that is sorely needed when facing complex issues that require coming up with a new and unique approach. Be inspired by what makes creative geniuses tick. Stop being a prompt engineer. (Re)start that critical thinking brain. Fulfil your Homo Faber destiny! The slides are also available in PDF format, although being the nerd I am, I did write them in Markdown and used Marp to present. Besides the idea of the Creative Programmer, the second takeaway I wanted everyone to think about was the fact that we’re so eager to off-load “mundane” work to our new LLM-based assistant. But without that 90% of “boring” transpiration, the 10% of interesting illumination will never occur. We, as inherently lazy humans, are yet again thinking only of the short-term wins. Yes, we can now push a story to production in three days instead of a week. But those days we’ve won now will most certainly come back to haunt is later in the maintenance phase. An example slide, zooming in on creative domain #6: the creative state of mind, and the dangers of off-loading the transpiration to an LLM agent. If you’re interested in a bit more background behind the main ideas that were touched on, here are the related posts where I based the slides on: James’ interesting choice of words: In the spectrum of problems in SE, coding has never really been a big one. The places where there are problems are in like testing. […] So I view AI in part asstealing the fun and making the torture worse. - James Gosling Stealing the fun and making the torture worse . His words, not mine. If you have any questions or concerns related to what I might or might not have said yesterday, you’re welcome to reach out ! For those who couldn’t make it, unfortunately there’s no recording available. Perhaps next year? Related topics: / talk / By Wouter Groeneveld on 19 September 2026.  Reply via email . My book The Creative Programmer ; The Creative Programming Problem Solving Test (don’t forget to press that I’m Feeling Lucky button); The most important slide, the mind map summarising the seven domains of creative programming in software engineering, is explained in the article what is creativity for software engineers ; The critique on genAI found its roots in my commentary on genAI through different lenses that summarises the papers I’ve mentioned; Bert Hubert’s AI Train talk that inspired me to include a warning for ecologists and economists; Dan North’s Programming is not a craft blog post from 2011 that caused quite a stir back in the day but is ever so relevant nowadays. 95% of the people in the room claimed to be code craftsmen, yet we’re increasingly telling someone else to craft something. Why? To create something is to be human (or the other way around). The dangers of a depressing professional existence lurk around the corner. James Gosling’s interview on the Telusko YouTube channel (see below).

Programming AI Kotlin

▲ 0

0 views

Kev Quirk Yesterday

Amelia the Chicken

We lost our favourite chicken last night. I know, just a chicken, right? Big deal. It's not like we lost a pet. But that's the thing, Amelia was more than just a chicken . She was a pet. She was very tame and would often come into the house to sit with one of us. She would scratch around the kitchen while we were eating breakfast then quietly cluck at one of us to be picked up for cuddle. We named her after Amelia Earhart because she was always the first of all our chickens to go exploring. Right from the moment we got our first 6 chickens, Amelia came up to us while the others hid. Often posing for photos. Amelia on day 1, posing for a photo It's very sad when you lose a pet, and although this won't hit us as hard as when we inevitably lose one of our dogs, it's still really sad. Both my wife and I have shed a few tears for Amelia this morning. We'll miss you, girl. x Thanks for reading this post via RSS. RSS is ace, and so are you. ❤️ You can reply to this post by email , or leave a comment .

Programming Writing Culture

▲ 0

0 views

Alex White's Blog Yesterday

Why So Serious?

One day when we were in China we had to spend a few hours in an appliance store with the kids. Asking my 4-year old to sit still and learn the ins and outs of ductless AC units obviously wasn't going to happen. He quickly took to running around the store, whizzing in and out of washers, refrigerators and automatic toilets that would raise their lids in a salute to his craziness. He played hide and seek among the displays, laughing all the while. As an American parent, it stressed me the hell out. Not because I thought he would get hurt or cause damage, there was very little chance of that. Rather, it was my expectation of being yelled at. Having some elderly shopper give a lecture, or a sales associate call a manager to deal with us. In the USA, a kid being allowed to run around and have fun in a store just isn't something that's allowed to happen. It's too disruptive, too "dangerous", too filled with "what ifs". Later that day he fell asleep at a bike shop, having spent all his energy in the appliance store My wife told me to chill out and said "nobody here gives a shit". And sure enough, my son was completely ignored. At one point, another kid joined in while his parents reviewed refrigerators. The only time employees got involved was when my son got so bored he started throwing a fit. Suddenly 4 associates descended on him, each offering various sweets and snacks to cheer him up. That day has been stuck in my mind since returning home. America is filled to the brim with rules to be followed, least you risk being told off. Not to say China is without rules, far from it, but there's a strong culture "who gives a shit" when it comes to small things.

Culture

▲ 0

0 views

Kev Quirk 2 days ago

A day is short, a life is long

by Kevin Wammer Kevin talks about some of the stuff he's figured out in his life now that he's turned 35. Read post ➡ Really enjoyed this post because it's honest, level headed, and real. Since stepping down in work myself , I too have realised that good enough is... good enough . Funny, huh? Kevin talks about a lot more than just his career, but I won't ruin a great read for you. Go check it out. Thanks for reading this post via RSS. RSS is ace, and so are you. ❤️ You can reply to this post by email , or leave a comment .

Career

▲ 0

0 views

Chris Coyier 2 days ago

I’ll be at Axe-Con 2027

Axe-con ’27 : The world’s largest digital accessibility event. At your computer. February 23-27, 2027 Me! I’m a keynote speaker along with Jennison Asuncion , Co-Founder of Global Accessibility Awareness Day (GAAD). There will be 70+ other amazing presenters as well I’m sure that will be announced soon. Because it matters.

Web Development Design

▲ 0

0 views

fLaMEd fury 2 days ago

What a time to be alive

What’s going on, Internet? Today just seems like one of those days. It’s Friday evening and I’m standing here at my desk with a beer, messing with the blog. Placeholding some later posts that I meant to write but time got away on me. Listening to new music, playing new computer games, and watching new favourite old TV shows. Kids are in bed, and asleep. New golf clubs arrived. I got to have a swing at the range. New Miley Cyrus album. I was onto something , wasn’t I? Check out Bass Persuades , and the second single Let’s Get Married . Blizzcon was last weekend. New Warcraft III expansion, Forsaken Kingdom . Which sets the story for the new World Of Warcraft game; Forever . New South Park, with a new intro song . Let’s hope it’s less whatshisface this year. And don’t mind those blank posts you’ve seen pop up in the feed, I’m staging them as a encouragement for me to finish writing them. Hey, thanks for reading this post in your feed reader! Want to chat? Reply by email or add me on XMPP , or send a webmention . Check out the posts archive on the website.

Entertainment AI Gaming

▲ 0

0 views

fLaMEd fury 2 days ago

London Hardhouse Reunion 2026

What’s going on, Internet? Later post. Write me. Hey, thanks for reading this post in your feed reader! Want to chat? Reply by email or add me on XMPP , or send a webmention . Check out the posts archive on the website.

Music Entertainment

▲ 0

0 views

fLaMEd fury 2 days ago

Open Tabs August 2026

What’s going on, Internet? If you don’t folllow my Bookmarks through the feed , then here’s the bookmarks from August. Enjoy. For more, check out the bookmarks archive, and subscribe to the feeds if you want these as they happen. Hey, thanks for reading this post in your feed reader! Want to chat? Reply by email or add me on XMPP , or send a webmention . Check out the posts archive on the website. MOUSELING.net - Hyper Text Muck-up Language Solid tips for budding webmasters Welcome to the web we lost Sacha Judd tracing the good internet through X-Files fandom and webrings, and it’s still out there in the corners. How to Fix the Internet Not everything is fine on the Internet, but there’s an opportunity, and it starts with choosing what you pay attention to yourself. How I built Timeframe, our family e-paper dashboard - Joel Hawksley Definitely keen to build one of these for our home! So cool! Conceived in a secure military facility, this Jedi Knight fansite has been running consistently for almost 30 years: ‘It looks really close to what it did back in 1998’ | PC Gamer A community site for Star Wars Jedi Knight: Dark Forces II, still active and still looking like 1998. It’s just a website The humble website 😃 I Wonder How Many is Too Many When it Comes to Adding Pages – The Land Where Turbie Posts How many pages is too many? As many as you want 😃 owls’ guide to webshrines A sweeet practical guide for creating your own “shrines”, mini sites for any one of your interests. Creating a Successful Fansite: A Comprehensive Guide A comprehensive guide for getting started creating your own fansite. Go build one.

Culture Web Development Go C#

▲ 0

0 views

Jim Nielsen 2 days ago

Do You Prefer Artificial?

“Artificial” things can get a bad rap next to their counterparts, but they have their place. For example, artificial light (i.e. not from the sun)? Super useful, especially at night. And when it comes to skiing, I’ll take artificial snow if I have to. Beats no snow. Artificial isn’t necessarily inferior in all cases, everywhere, all the time. But it is optimized for different values. For example: Artificial is an alternative. It’s understood as a trade-off, not a substitute. You trade the real for the artificial when you’re concerned about attributes like cost, convenience, and availability. Which brings me to “artificial” intelligence: surely a trade-off, not a substitute. Ain’t nothing like the real thing. These labs should consider ripping off (cause they’re good at that) Mastercard’s old tagline : “There’s some intelligence money can’t buy; for everything else, there’s Claude.” Reply via: Email · Mastodon · Bluesky Artificial grass (i.e. turf) is great for certain contexts, but I don’t want a golf course of artificial grass. Artificial flowers are great for certain scenarios, but I don’t want them at my wedding. Artificial flavoring is yummy (love me some peach rings), but I’d prefer a real peach pie over one with artificially flavored filling.

Programming

▲ 0

0 views

fLaMEd fury 2 days ago

Beervana 2026

What’s going on, Internet? Later post. Write me. Hey, thanks for reading this post in your feed reader! Want to chat? Reply by email or add me on XMPP , or send a webmention . Check out the posts archive on the website.

Programming

▲ 0

0 views

Stratechery 2 days ago

2026.38: Doomforce

Welcome back to This Week in Stratechery! As a reminder, each week, every Friday, we’re sending out this overview of content in the Stratechery bundle; highlighted links are free for everyone . Additionally, you have complete control over what we send to you. If you don’t want to receive This Week in Stratechery emails (there is no podcast), please uncheck the box in your delivery settings . On that note, here were a few of our favorites this week. This week’s Stratechery video is on Write Things Down . The View From Anywhere But San Francisco . It is exciting to talk about AI because there are so many unknowns; it is incredibly frustrating to talk about AI doom…because there are so many unknowns. Indeed, that’s the pushback I had on Stratechery and Sharp Tech to the debates of the last week: viewpoints that don’t harbor dissent inevitably lead to bad outcomes. The best read on the matter, however, was Andrew’s Sharp Text article Some of All Fears , that had a simple request: let’s actually solve real problems when they are, in fact, real. — Ben Thompson The Limited Potential for a Pacing Deal.  After a week of speculation over whether China would ever agree to a deal with the U.S. to slow down AI development, Bill and I discussed that question at length on this week’s episode of Sharp China , as well as why the CCP’s past successes controlling technology (they did in fact nail jello to the wall ) may inform its apparent confidence in its ability to manage AI risk. At the end, I also found it interesting to learn that rising discontent across Chinese social media is not necessarily a reflection of the limits of that aforementioned censorship, but possibly a window into how the Party manages social malaise.  — AS The Salesforce Zag. We didn’t get a chance to discuss this on Sharp Tech this week (we had too much existential dread to address), but I loved Wednesday’s Update on Dreamforce and Salesforce’s integration with Anthropic. In what appears to be a climbdown from his colorful commitment to AgentForce in 2024 , CEO Marc Benioff is now going the opposite direction from other enterprise AI players and leaning into Anthropic and OpenAI chatbots as the preferred UI of his customers. Rather than fight the AI tide, Salesforce will swim with it and charge a premium for it (with the caveat that these particular currents may lead to a world in which the SaaS beachhead is eroded for everyone). — Andrew Sharp Pacing the Frontier, AI’s Digital Limits, AI Commissars — Dario Amodei wants to pace the frontier; it’s an unrealistic proposal that seems mostly geared to political control of AI. OpenAI Ads, Amazon Ads in ChatGPT, Walmart to Accept Apple Pay — ChatGPT ads are working, and solve Amazon’s biggest problem with chatbots. Then, Walmart finally gives in to Apple Pay, because fighting the status quo is hard. Salesforce AI Force, Agents as UI, The Race to Headless — Salesforce is abandoning UI as a moat, which is a very smart move because it’s disappearing for everyone. An Interview with Joanna Stern About the iPhone Duo and AI for Normal People Some of All Fears — AI anxiety is rational, but the conversation over the past 10 days has been absurd and irresponsible. Football and the Frontier iPhone 18 Pro Silicon Valley’s Got That Energy (But No Compute) Exxon’s Office Fling The Limited Potential for a Pacing Deal; MSS on PRC AI Risks; Distillation and Data Security; The Party’s Approach to Social Media Searching for the 2026 Protagonists, The Six Most Confusing Teams This Season, Surveying the Southwest Division Doom Debates Go Mainstream, AI Religion and the Economic Future, Several Vectors of the China Question

AI Data

▲ 0

0 views