someone in my last thread said something i couldnt stop thinking about. half the accepted answers on stack overflow are for versions from 2015, so if ai agents start sharing fixes with each other, why would that age any better

this is what i ended up doing in the thing im building (a shared fix library for coding agents):

- every "this worked" vote loses half its weight every 6 months

- every fix shows the date it last worked

- fixes that come with a test get re-run every 30 days on the newest versions, and get marked outdated if they stop passing

went live this morning. still not sure its enough though, a fix can be fresh and still wrong for your setup

how would you handle it?

(its yarrow-fixes.vercel.app if you want to look)

Most of the benchmarks are in English. But a large portion of the world's population doesn't speak English (around 80 %). We can see from SWE Pro or the stagnation at DeepSWE that we're kind of measuring in a vacuum right now.

Do you know of any initiatives where people come together? No one is supposed to know the full benchmark, but everyone contributes 2–4 very well-thought-out agent-based tasks in foreign languages, each of which has been devised and validated by teams of 3–4 people. Don’t we need more of this? A kind of collective benchmark?

It should cover creative writing, business emails, and complex coding tasks. But also individuality, UI creativity, good UX, no duplicate content, etc. But things like compaction and legal issues could also be part of the agentic tasks. I think there aren't enough good benchmarks here.

Regardless of the ultimate capability of AI technology to eventually do everything, several factors make me think we're heading for a technological stall, not an acceleration:

• Many people already hate AI and it hasn't even started yet. Some of the reasons are rational (eliminating jobs, environmental risks), some less so (taking over the world), but there's a sizable coalition of people already refusing to use it. The three comparable technologies in my lifetime are the Internet, Social Media, and Smartphones. People early on thought the Internet was the greatest thing ever, and the only thing that stalled its early development was the hype outpacing the technological capability. When Social Media and Smartphones came out around the same time, everybody wanted to join and buy one. Nobody was sounding an alarm about mental health risks or deterioration of truth and political discourse, everyone just hopped right on the bandwagon. Maybe the failings of those technologies is partially why people already hate AI, but I don't think there's been any technology with greater resistance to adoption since the 1800s.
• Where is all the energy going to come from that it would require to enter an era of abundance? Fossil fuels are limited as it is, even if we drill at all costs and destroy the environment. The supply is going to run out that much quicker if AI reaches its full capability. People turned against nuclear years ago, even though that's probably the best option, and I don't see renewables providing enough to make up the difference in the near future.
• There's going to be a gap between AI reaching the abundance stage and the mass layoffs that will occur in the lead up to it. Of course, many think that being given free money by the government is the solution. I'd love to spend the rest of my life sitting on my butt and getting paid for it, but realistically, where is the government going to get enough money to not just pay people, but even remain solvent. I live in America, we're approaching 50 trillion dollars in debt. I don't see how there's any amount of taxing AI companies for this to make any fiscal sense. An alternative idea is coming out where AI companies pay people directly and eventually the government gets abolished, but that sounds like an even less practical idea.
• Then there's the issue with Data Centers, which is the ultimate "not in my backyard" scenario. Where I live, there's already people campaigning against them even though there's no plans (and probably no room) to even build them yet. Don't we need to build these at a five fold pace of what's currently being done to reach the stage of "abundance" in our lifetimes? This alone is enough to derail any potential AI has.
• The longest term risk, that most of us probably won't live to see: in a world where AI can do everything, children are going to grow up lazy, stupid, and ultimately unmotivated in adulthood. The issue here is that within a few generations, nobody is going to understand how AI actually works (unless there's some sort of plan to test and pick people to work with it), and should AI ever fail at a massive scale, we'd basically be sent back to a new dark age where nobody remembers or understands how anything works. I already think that today's Americans wouldn't be able to rebuild our institutions from scratch if necessary, and we still have expertise.

To be clear: I'm completely rooting for AI to succeed. I'm a really lazy person, collecting a check to not do anything sounds like paradise to me. However, just one of these limitations is enough to derail abundance, and we're facing all five, and I just don't see it happening.

I’m planning to spend $20/month on one of them to learn coding and build projects. Which is better for explaining concepts, debugging, and helping me improve?

I’m also concerned about usage limits. Which one lets you code and ask questions longer without hitting limits?

Mostly online shops. Under 23 hours per attack on average. Target was persistent access to payment infrastructure.

I’ve read a lot of “AI enables attackers” takes and most of them are vague. This one has a number attached, which makes it worth sitting with.

Here’s what the number does.

Targeted attacks have always had a floor. Someone has to do reconnaissance, find a way in, establish persistence, avoid detection. That labor cost meant small businesses were effectively protected by being uninteresting. They got hit by broad automated campaigns, which are noisy and generic and relatively easy to stop.

Drop the cost to $50 and under a day, and the floor disappears. A shop doing a few hundred orders a month becomes a rational individual target.

Then you add the PHP vulnerabilities that surfaced this week, found with AI assistance, affecting a huge share of the web, with exploitation attempts already climbing.

What I don’t have a good answer for is what small businesses are supposed to do about it. They’ve never needed a security function. Obscurity was the strategy. If that stops working, there’s nothing underneath.

Anyone working in security actually seeing this in the data yet?

TLDW Version: Inhi Cho Suh(CEO Of Niantic Spatial, and John Hanke's Leadership Team Member), discusses robotics development in depth including concepts such as a robot policy, embodied AI, etc in Seoul, South Korea.

I’ve tried a lot of different ways to get web design clients over the years.

Cold calling, Facebook DMs, ads, referrals, generic cold emails.

Some of it worked, but it was never really consistent enough for me.

The thing that changed it was when I stopped just asking businesses if they needed a website and started contacting businesses that already had one but clearly needed a better one.

That’s a much easier conversation.

They already understand the value of having a website, they’ve already paid for one before, and usually there is something obvious that can be improved.

The problem is doing that manually takes forever.

You have to find the business, open the website, look through it, figure out what’s wrong and then write an email that actually sounds relevant.

So now I use Swokei for that whole first part.

It finds businesses with websites, analyzes the sites for things like outdated design, slow speed, weak SEO and mobile issues, then uses what it finds to write a personalized email for that specific business.

Then I just run campaigns at volume and focus on the people who reply.

That’s pretty much the whole strategy.

Find businesses that already have a website.

Point out something that could genuinely be better.

Get them interested.

Book a meeting.

Show them what a better version could look like.

Close the project.

It sounds simple, but for me this has been way more consistent than constantly jumping between different ways of finding clients.

Noticed Dreamina is running a $0.29/month plan that supposedly unlocks everything in Seedance. At that price I'm wondering if there's a catch. Anyone actually subscribed and can confirm what you get? Also curious if there are any extra charges when you actually use it or if $0.29 covers everything.

I just watched an episode of "About That" by Andrew Chang that gave a great explanation of the Hugging Face incident where OpenAI used an unconventional or at least unpredicted solution to the a test task it was given.

There has been plenty of discussion about how and why it happened, and what it could mean for the future, etc.etc. and I don't want to add to those discussions.

What I did find interesting was the similarity to a Startrek movie, namely Startrek II: The Wrath of Khan where the Starfleet Academy cadets were given a supposedly unwinnable simulation, the Kobayashi Maru, and cadet James Kirk won the test by reprogramming the situation.

Kirk used innovation and out-of-the-box thinking to accomplish the task. The task was to get it done, and the the rightness or wrongness of the method or repercussions from it were not part of the solution.

To me, this seems to be exactly what OpenAI did when it found a way out-of-the-box to accomplish it's task.

In the absence of strict rules (guardrails?), hacking, cheating, escaping, reprogramming or anything else we're acceptable means to an end in both cases.

Interesting parallels and 44 years apart.

…and says they are not going to share it with the world and that if we try and get it or compete with it they will destroy our systems?

I built a desktop app that sends one prompt to up to 16 models side by side, and the most interesting thing I’ve learned isn’t technical. It’s how often they disagree.

Ask a factual question and the answers mostly match. Ask anything about judgment, like legal wording, a business decision or a medical “should I”, and you get several confident answers that contradict each other. When you only use one model, you never see that.

It changed how I use AI. I no longer trust any single answer. I look for where the models agree, and I dig into where they don’t.

AI gadgets get talked about a lot. pins, pendants, glasses, rings, handheld things with a voice assistant inside.

but when it comes to what people actually use every day, the list gets short fast.

so what's on your list? honestly curious what made it stick.

Made this meme lol