It will be interesting to see how this plays out though. People follow the money. Investors wouldn't be interested if they didn't see the value. If the new app can snag the network effects, then it will win. What is TikTok worth without the US audience?
The buyers are so absurdly wealthy that it’s not really wealth anymore, it’s power. They’re simply trading some of their dragon hoard of power for some other form of it. These people are above pedestrian worries about ROI.
> People follow the money. Investors wouldn't be interested if they didn't see the value.
The value may well be in currying favor with the Trump regime, not in the actual deal for itself. If you can lose a few billion on becoming best friends with an increasingly authoritarian leadership, you may well get much more power and future opportunities from that.
It might be zionism rather than 'fanboiing' over Trump that motivates him. It seems one has to curry favours with Trump to keep him tolerant of Netanyahu and unconditionally supporting of the state of Israel, and this would likely have such an effect.
Recently the Ellison clan dumped a large amount of money on the infamous genocidaire Bari Weiss and is pushing CBS to accept her as a senior member of their news organisation.
There are probably a lot of reasons I haven't encountered.
Among the common ones I have are things like Palestine being like a lawless laboratory where industrialists are trying out new gadgets and systems on human populations, which is an important driver in civil as well as military state power towards both their own populations and foreign.
It's also one of the last surviving colonial projects and some old money dynasties stick by it for nostalgic or geopolitical reasons. Related to this is a common form of racism, where the state of Israel is perceived as a civilised western bulwark against the unshaven barbaric hordes of the east.
Then there are religious convictions, especially common among usians, who are often of the belief that there is a God that has a plan for the cosmos that involves first telling the jews about ethics and then replacing them with christians but keeping the jews around as the first line of defense in the ultimate war to end all wars and history itself. Usually this is expressed as a philosemitic form of antisemitism where they see themselves as kind of stewards of the jewish diaspora communities and take on themselves the purpose of moving all jews close to Jerusalem, where this final war is supposed to begin. It's not uncommon that these people perceive arab and persian muslims as basically an Antichrist entity that needs to be eradicated, either in the short term if they're uppity or kept in some form of economic or political bondage.
While there's a lot of conspiracist beliefs surrounding it I'm also convinced there is some truth to the view that israeli security services keeps a lot of kompromat and similar tools of power involving rich and powerful people. Open assassinations and the like have backfired sometimes, e.g. the Lillehammer scandal, and I suspect that this has pushed israeli security to try to adapt to more shadowy tactics.
And then you have people with Holocaust or related forms of shallowly antiracist anxieties, that have convinced themselves that the jews deserve Palestine due to historic attempts at extermination. This is somewhat related to christian zionist beliefs where jews are considered somehow special, 'a chosen people', which is why they are supposedly deserving of an atrocity-laden settler colonial project but e.g. the cirkassians are not and they don't care about the christians of Artsakh and so on.
Plus the economic opportunities due to huge free-money investments into corporations situated in Israel and more mundane imperial considerations like the geopolitical positioning as a destabilising force between Eurasia and Africa as well as on the edge of Eurasia itself. The Mediterranean is small but imagine if there was high-speed rail and a decent degree of social and economic integration all the way from South Africa and Mauritania up to Europe, that would make this a hugely important economic and political area and North America would look puny and useless beside it, due to being surrounded by oceans and so on. Israel also happens to be a base for nuclear weapons placed really close to some of the largest energy reserves on the planet, and largely dependent on states really far away that in turn are highly dependent on the exploitation of these energy reserves.
Also, some people are plain sadists. They feel pleasure and giddiness when they know there are other people on what they perceive as their team doing the worst of things, just the nastiest possible stuff, the most excruciating forms of hierarchy and power imbalance. Sometimes because that makes the power imbalances that keep them in place look relatively sane and tolerable.
He does sort of mention "story" several times. The story is the meaningful part. It's just that he says meaning follows tension. Maybe you don't agree with that either (not sure I do) but he does mention this.
> BSI is effectively democratizing security and compliance for open source so that it doesn’t require million-dollar contracts from vendors with sky-high valuations.
I suppose 50k isn't a million dollar contract, but it's certainly also not "democratizing" anything
Depending on your needs, this could be a bargain as advertised. It's only expensive relative to what you can build on your own, or what competitors offer.
It's a bit tricky to work through all the jargon, but it's my understanding that they are simply pulling the mass of things that they provide for free. You can still get the Docker files for their offerings (not sure they offer all tags though?") and you can even use the images from Docker Hub.
But. What they are offering is considered "development" regardless of what you are using it for? In other words, NOT a production environment, because they aren't giving you a production environment (or at least what they define as a production environment.) What they give you for free is the "latest" and on a Debian system.
What they offer as "secure" is running on Photon OS and goes through a security pipeline, etc. They aren't holding anything back aside from the services they provide.
Not sure about the MCP, but I find that using something (RAG or otherwise provide docs) to point the LLM specifically to what you're trying to use works better than just relying on its training data or browsing the internet. An issue I had was that it would use outdated docs, etc.
Wait a minute, you didn't just claim that we have reached AGI, right? I mean, that's what it would mean to delegate work to junior engineers, right? You're delegating work to human level intelligence. That's not what we have with LLMs.
Love this, and it's so true. A lot of people don't get this, because it's so nuanced. It's not something that's slowing you down. It's not learning a technical skill. Rather, it's building an intuition.
I find it funny when people ask me if it's true that they can build an app using an LLM without knowing how to code. I think of this... that it took me months before I started feeling like I "got it" with fitting LLMs into my coding process. So, not only do you need to learn how to code, but getting to the point that the LLM feels like a natural extension of you has its own timeline on top.
Spot on. I code for last 25+ years. It took me a while (say about a week) to start using it meaningfully. I would not still claim I am using it efficiently or have the most productive work flow, which I think is because of the fact I keep figuring out new techniques almost on a daily basis.
No, it's a practice. You're not necessarily building technical knowledge, rather you're building up an intuition. It's for sure not like learning a programming language. It's more like feeling your way along and figuring out how to inhabit a dwelling in the dark. We would just have to agree to disagree on this. I feel exactly as the parent commenter felt. But it's not easy to explain (or to understand from someones explanation.)
Wow, there's a lot here that I didn't know about. Just never drilled that far into the options presented. For a change, I'm happy that I read the article rather than only the comments on HN. ;)
And lots of helpful comments here on HN as well. Good job everyone involved. ;)
My take on this is that Google has a bunch of "incubating" spaces where they have teams of people building things that may or may not take off. So, when something does take off, it sort of becomes a victim of its own success. It confuses people because it's not a "core" Google product that fits nicely among other Google products. NotebookLLM seems to be another example.
Personally, I would rather Google did this sort of experimentation even if it is more confusing.
Or I could be wrong about this. But following NotebookLLM, it seemed like the team developing it had a lot of autonomy.
That is so, but the problem this causes is more than just customer confusion - it is a lack of integration and responsibility. There is no "let's polish this and see if it works based on real user feedback", but it's "let's throw this out and shut it down if it doesn't work".
And if it isn't shut down, it is left in that terrible half-documented state, with confusing integrations and terribly integrated into the rest of the product.
Considering I'm confused both as a customer, user and a shareholder, I'd say the tactic isn't working.
If they throw it out and it's great then they get accolades; if they throw it out and it's bad, they don't. If they polish it and see if it works based on real user feedback then they also don't but it took longer. Better to just throw everything at the wall the instant it has the potential to go viral and then move on if it doesn't.
Remember that Google operates at huge scale, so even something any other company would consider wildly successful (e.g. Reader) is a waste of resources for them. That means that if you're ramping up your product over the course of a year you're wasting time and money. Go big or go home.
The teams of people want to get their work out into the public to make a big splash so they can get a sweet bonus before anyone realizes that it's not actually useful or effective. See also: Google Wave, and 80% of their other products.
They don't get a sweet bonus and promotion for helping another team improve a product, so why collaborate? Just create your own chat app according to your own team's vision/goals/available technology and release it and hope it gains more traction than the other teams' existing options.
Yeah and they have like 50 coding agents, because everyone in the entire company turned to doing the same thing. There's not that much you can invent in this space.
I think the basic issue for me is that people put this stuff out as if it's some big discovery, and yet my own usage is way different and serves me just fine thank you. These have the feel of a developer who has just discovered development and then want to tell you about all the best tools. But it's not really about showing you the best tools, is it? Rather, it's about riding the hype train and creating slop for more eyeballs.
Respectfully, I think you are being reflexively contrarian or overindexing on the vibe coding hype train. The way vibe coding UX works is basically just having LLMs guess what they need to do to complete a task and then sending it off to do it and try to fix anything that doesn't go according to plan along the way. Nothing big there.
I had started working on an AI devtool product a few months before Cursor took off, I didn't even know about them when I first started, and I hated that such a dumb UX was setting the narrative in this space. LLMs had essentially no ability to decompose and plan tasks at the time, and they weren't fucking sandboxing it!
Terminal agents are actually moving towards the UX I've been building/anticipating for. In March of 2024 I was playing around with GPT4 and saw it oneshot a microservice I asked it to make. I was so excited about the implications of where this stuff could go that I quit my job at google just to start building in this space.
Without getting into all the details, I am pretty convinced there must be some particular way of arranging infrastructure primitives and AI-coding tools in a way that properly decomposes and executes arbitrarily large or complicated tasks (limited only by available time and resources). Claude code is IMO getting closer to that by the week. No iterative change is crazy science or anything but there are some genuinely novel and exciting patterns for computing things underway.
When someone has a YouTube channel about programming with a certain level of polish they are not trying to be a professional programmer, they are trying to be a professional YouTuber.
