I think I agree with this. It's made me realise LLMs are great for prototyping processes in the same way that 3D printers are great at prototyping physical things. They make it quick and easy to get something close enough to see the unforeseen problems a proper solution might have.

It's grown into a product of cults and attempted zingers rather than pragmatic or sensible technical discussions about what we should and shouldn't expect to be able to do with an individual programming language.

edit: to clarify, I assume there needs to be a basical level of comprehension of programming languages to debate the nuance of one, and if you can't think of a single reason as to why someone would want types removed, that's a possible indicator you don't have that necessary level yet, and I think the most effective way for you to learn that is to Google it. Sorry for coming across as rude if you genuinely don't know this stuff.

If you already know many reasons as to why types would be removed, then it seems disingenuous to ask that question, other than to make the point that you feel types shouldn't be stripped. If you think that, say it, and explain why you think they shouldn't be stripped.

Anyway, I really like this idea, it's cool. When I think about this one though, I feel there's too much friction in the follow/unfollow process. Having unfollowing requiring reenecrypting and rebuilding the entire website for everyone seems cumbersome. It's not a killer in itself, but combined with this:

> If the original post is inaccessible (e.g. the viewer doesn’t follow the author), the reply is hidden entirely. A user only sees replies from people they follow — this is the spam prevention mechanism.

I think this is going to prevent it from scaling in any desirable way. I know it's not intended to scale, and is targetted at smaller freinds networks, not influencers, but again, even small friendship networks grow complex, and I can see the experience on S@t turning into the worst parts of activitypub where you can only read half of the interesting replies because not being friends, and it being a pain to then become mutual friends.

But, I really, really do like that s@t feels like a combination of RSS, activity pub and static sites, having a browser heavy client is interesting to.

It does feel a bit like s@t wants stuff to be easily locked down between a dynamic list of friends though, and it feels a bit weird to have the foundational tech of such a protocol be static sites, which by definition make it hard to lock stuff down to a dynamic list of friends. Hmmmm, I really do love/hate static site architecture

This is nice though, thanks for sharing.

I don't use Discord generally, but the fedify Discord is particularly useful, and I see how some discussions there have evolved into features in this release which is nice too!

I do understand your point that people at risk of state level attacks might get a false surface level appearance of defence from this. But then anyone who's a target of state level attacks and is making OS decisions based on a surface level understanding of the tech is not going to have a good time anyway.

There's a distinction between tokens per second and time to first token.

Delays come for me when I have to load a new model, or if I'm swapping in a particularly large context.

Most of the time, since the model is already loaded, and I'm starting with a small context that builds over time, tokens per second is the biggest impactor.

It's worth noting I don't do much fancy stuff, a tiny bit of agent stuff, I mainly use qwen-coder 30a3b or qwen2.5 code instruct/base 7b.

I'm finding more complex agent stuff where multiple agents are used can really slow things down if they're swapping large contexts. ik_llama has prompt caching which help speed this up when swapping between agent contexts up until a point.

tldr: loading weights each time isn't much of a problem, unless you're having to switch between models and contexts a lot, which modern agent stuff is starting to.

Is this an article by someone who's just done ISO 27001 for the first time and realised that?

I think it might be adults ignoring established grammar rules to make a statement about how they identify a part of a group of AI evangelists.

Kind of like how teenagers do nonsensical things like where thick heavy clothing regardless of the weather to indicate how much of a badass them and their other badass coat wearing friends are.

To normal humans, they look ridiculous, but they think they're cool and they're not harming anyone so I just leave them to it.

That’s what it is. A shibboleth. They’re broadcasting group affiliation. The fact that it grates on the outgroup is intentional. If it wasn’t costly to adopt it wouldn’t be as honest of a signal.

Like look at the sentence "it has felt to me like all threads of conversation have veered towards the extreme and indefensible." The casing actually conflicts with the tone of the sentence. It's not written like a casual text - if the sentence was "ppl talking about this are crazy" then sure, the casing would match the tone. But the stodgy sentence structure and use of more precise vocabulary like "veered" indicates that more effort has gone into this than the casing suggests.

Fair play if the author just wants to have a style like this. It's his prerogative to do so, just as anyone can choose to communicate exclusively in leetspeak, or use all caps everywhere, or write everything like script dialogue, whatever. Or if it's a tool to signal that he's part of an in-group with certain people who do the same, great. But he is sacrificing readability by ignoring conventions.

I agree with the sentiment too, or maybe I am getting old :P

Some people are being lazy, they will get less attention, ideally

The new generation of tiktok / podcast "independent journalists" is a serious issue / case of what you describe. They are many doing zero journalism and repeating propaganda, some paid by countries like Russia (i.e. Tim Pool and that whole crew that got caught and never face consequences)

fixed it for you! now it’s in a casual, laid back tone.

I use opencode and have done a few toy projects and little changes in small repositories and can get pretty speedy and stable experience up to a 64k context.

It would probably fall apart if I wanted to use it on larger projects, but I've often set tasks running on it, stepped away for an hour, and had a solution when I return. It's definitely useful for smaller project, scaffolding, basic bug fixes, extra UI tweaks etc.

I don't think "usable" a binary thing though. I know you write lot about this, but it'd be interesting to understand what you're asking the local models to do, and what is it about what they do that you consider unusable on a relative monster of a laptop?

What's interesting to me about this model is how good it allegedly is with no thinking mode. That's my main complaint about qwen3:30b, how verbose its reasoning is. For the size it's astonishing otherwise.

I'm hoping for an experience where I can tell my computer to do a thing - write a code, check for logged errors, find something in a bunch of files - and I get an answer a few moments later.

Setting a task and then coming back to see if it worked an hour later is too much friction for me!