The entire New Zealand population will be looking for his bunker if that creep thinks he can live here peacefully

Why do you think they need AI driven weapons?

It's a pretty brutal negative feedback loop. This video explains it quite well https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBpgTgFF1ek

Even immigrants are just using New Zealand as a stepping-stone country to later move to Australia.

It feels like people do this to Canada to get in to the USA as well.

Ireland->UK seems to be increasing as well because of the Common Travel Area.

I think a lot of historical agreements of this nature will not hold up in the era of mass international migration. The CTA is obviously a complex example.

how is 2-3 centralized providers of this new technology "democratization"?

It's _relatively_ democratic when compared to these counterfactual gatekeeping scenarios:

- What if these centralized providers had restricted their LLMs to a small set of corporations / nations / qualified individuals?

- What if Google that invented the core transformer architecture had kept the research paper to themselves instead of openly publishing it?

- What if the universities / corporations, who had worked on concepts like the attention mechanism so essential for Google's paper, had instead gatekept it to themselves?

- What if the base models, recipes, datasets, and frameworks for training our own LLMs had never been open-sourced and published by Meta/Alibaba/DeepSeek/Mistral/many more?

> - What if Google that invented the core transformer architecture had kept the research paper to themselves instead of openly publishing it?

I'm pretty sure that someone else would have come around the corner with a similar idea some time later, because the fundamentals of these stuff were already discussed decases before "Attention is all you need" paper, the novel thing they did was combining existing knowhow into a new idea and making it public. A couple of ingredients of the base research for this is decades old (interestingly back then some European universities were leading the field)

> I'm pretty sure that someone else would have come around the corner with a similar idea some time later, because the fundamentals of these stuff were already discussed decases before

I am not trying to be dismissive, but this could apply to all research ever

thats true! I meant "not somewhen accidentally in the future" but more of "relative close together on the timeline"

There are lots of open weight models

You're right! And cars when they were invented didn't give increased mobility to millions of people, because they came from just a few manufacturers.

Cell phones made communication easier for exactly zero people even though billions have been sold. Why? Because they come from just a few different companies.

Cars are a great analogy because they made mobility significantly worse for people who can’t afford them or refuse to use them for ethical reasons.

Those people are the exception that proves the rule.

And cars now have become privacy nightmares, which we are now beholden to

I will tell that to the billions of people who are walking and biking around at this very moment. Just give me some time.

I said worse, not impossible. Because of cars, I have to take longer routes and put myself into danger while working.

Clincally proven bio-weapons

Side effects may include victory.

I'm so excited to be able to continue build things when I'm living on the streets. I'm glad to know that drive to create will always be with me and keep me warm during winters.

You can't speak this kind of truth on hacker news!

But, uh, yeah... I've been noticing a growing divide between people like OP who are either already retired or are wealthy enough that they could if they wanted to who absolutely love the new world of LLMs, and people who aren't currently financially secure and realize that LLMs are going to snatch their career away. Maybe not this year, but not too far out either.

I'm enjoying the new era of agentic-coding all your ideas, but it's been obvious to me for a while that jobs are going to tend towards ones where you're liked by the decisionmaker or capital owner and kept around to be the middleman decider-delegator to others/AI/robots.

Have warned my friends about this already.

What I think is lost on ones like OP, is that yes, they are financially secure in the current climate. But if the future that everyone seems to be ushering in does come true, even ones like OP will be in a different state of security.

How does the saying go again? "It takes a village to reach financially secure retirement"

Yeah this is some level of entitled selfish boomer talk here. Senior, stable, everything's fine for me, all of the ensuing impacts be damned.

Is that good?

Do you like things that look like bank runs? If so, then yes.

mmhmm. That's a lot of me me me. Are you reviewing others' work who produce the same output as you?

No no it makes sense. Hypothetical scenario: I, a high-level employee at a company just convinced my boss (or did we convince each other?) to spend $30k/year on Claude/Codex enterprise licenses. So far, the productivity gains have not been there and we're starting to sweat. So, I propose to my boss to build an internal version of $SaaS and call it a win. Galaxy brain.

Now some IC somewhere in the company who is at the end of his rope and sees the company as a dead end, sees an opportunity. Why not advocate for this project, get real experience building something greenfield in a brand new domain, strengthen their own resume, and finally have a way out of their strut? It's not like they're gonna stick around maintaining what they built.

No mention of the quality of the engineers reviewing the result?