I've heard this before, my AI is so powerful it's dangerous, I'm keeping it from you for your own safety. That's like that grade school boy saying I'm a blackbelt and my firsts need to be registered with law enforcement whenever I enter a new state.

I fell for that shit when I was 10. I'm confident we'll be laughing about this a year from now. I will take the bet that they made an incremental improvement and are hyping up the safety because it's pretty cool marketing. It certainly forces us to pay attention.

Claude 4.7...cool....probably similar as 4.5 to 4.6...I won't notice until my employer deploys it...but oh noes...we'll ruin cybersecurity for everyone?...now I have to pay attention and all my friends outside the industry are asking about it.

But the Right Wing Media/Podcast circuit reports on the news, just like anyone else...this is definitely newsworthy and will be one of those commonly told stories 30 years from now....like the lady at McDonald's who sued them because they serve hot coffee and she spilled in her lap (which yeah, there are details conveniently left out of that story, but you've heard it dozens of times by now).

You're correct about the AI mania. I just am curious to see if the response is universal ridicule...or will the grifters embrace it and replicate it for a quick buck?

So will Allbirds be the laughing stock of the Right Wing Media bubble....as they undoubtedly will be for the mainstream sectors and late night comics....or will the grifter wing of the Right Wing media movement push this as a story of American ingenuity and entrepreneurship, like they did when Long Island Tea Corp because Long Blockchain...mostly because everyone with common sense thought this was an April Fool's article.

I call bullshit. Everything you said is logical and SHOULD be true, but I don't believe it. I think the major manufacturers are colluding because it's much more profitable to cooperate with this endless demand than take a risk to crush your competition. We're seeing it across more and more industries. It's the same reason food prices are hiking even higher than the Trump tariffs and never coming down. In my area, Eggs are still literally 2x the price they were 4 years ago, despite the Avian flu issue subsiding. Beef prices are 2x as well. Why? consolidation and collusion. Everything is done through a few major producers and distributors and even the overwhelming vast majority of grocery stores are owned by 2 major companies (not counting Costco and Walmart). All these corporations are jacking up prices and getting record earnings and profits. They're doing so because they can...the market is failing us and failing us completely.

That's what the right wing free market fetishists forget EVERY FUCKING TIME. A free market is not natural. It requires gov intervention to keep it free...to stop collusion and monopolies. Big gov is evil?...I guess to some extent, but nothing compared to no gov....or a functionally useless one.

Full disclosure, I am a former Sony Pictures employee. I took a brief contract shortly after graduating to write logistics software for them. I thought it was a dream come true as a movie fan. It was a fucking nightmare, easily the worst-run place I've seen or even heard of. I've worked for the federal gov. state gov, academia, big banks, big corporations, and the software industry. For all the shit people give academia and the gov, they can't hold a candle to movie studio dysfunction. In fairness, it makes sense. Their profits are based more on choosing a great script or franchise moreso than day-to-day operations. It's a legacy business with a ton of execs getting paid way too much for diminishing market share. I don't consider them a serious business...at least 25 years ago when I worked for a few studios.

However, back on topic, Sony is historically one of the worst abusers of product placement. Never in my fucking life have I seen a Sony laptop in the wild, but they're in every movie...same with Sony phones. It's weird and jarring, but I don't honestly care too much...if the movie is good enough, I barely notice. It's especially obnoxious when they frame the shot to ensure that Sony logo is visible on protagonist's computer monitor and laptop...like when the soda companies would ensure the actors had the soda can perfectly framed, centered, and they endured to mention it a few times.

I'm a grown up and know that you have to pay millionaire producers salaries somehow...as well as the massive crews needed to make a traditional movie. But you're charging theaters massive and unsustainable fees....and then putting ads in your movies....as well as mostly releasing dogshit in the last 25 years...lame unoriginal blockbuster attempts...that just keep flopping.

So you're not wrong....30 min of ads suck...but hearing it from Sony is like hearing Mark Zuckerberg calling to respect user privacy and have corporations stop meddling in elections.

Anything that can't be repaired usually ends up in a landfill, probably leeching toxins into the soil. This is a massive environmental issue. Additionally, I hate how disposable goods propagate bad design. Things should be built to last. They should be repairable. If I am getting a $20 bluetooth speaker from the dollar store, OK, I have realistic expectations. However, it is heinous to make it difficult to repair a $3000+ laptop. I should be able to change the battery with nothing more than a screwdriver, especially for anything labeled "pro."

Hillary and Kamela sucked, end of story, just like Jeb and Mitt. People love Trump. No one loves Kamela or Hillary. You'll be hard pressed to find a voter who gives a fuck about them now that they're not running. People love Bernie. People love Obama. People love Trump. People who voted for Mitt, Jeb, Hillary, and Kamela preferred them over the competition, but didn't love them. People still care what Obama thinks. Who the fuck cares about anything that comes out of Hillary/Kamela/Mitt/Jeb's mouth these days?

The Democrats are fighting an unfair fight. With so much ignorance and propaganda propping up Republicans, For New being the most dangerous, they have to fight with rational thought. Democrats can lose voters. After Trump, few Republican voters are rational. They vote their beliefs, but VERY FEW rationally considered both sides and thought the Republican was a better fit for them. You'd have to be a billionaire to objectively benefit from a Republican administration. They voted on emotions or habit. It's a lot easier to lose a rational voter than an emotional one.

But, most importantly, the couch is always on the ballot. The Democrats need to run a candidate that people love...not simply one that is superior to the Republican offering. More individuals prefer Democratic candidates and policies, but more Republican voters show up...for a myriad of reasons...key of which is that the majority are emotional voters. The majority of Kamela voters voted out of duty, not excitement. She was boring AF. I can't say a nice thing about her other than she didn't suck and she was nice looking. I don't remember her being charming or likable. I don't remember anything interesting about her. I don't remember her being funny. I couldn't tell you anything about her personality. I can tell you a bunch about Bernie, AOC, and Fetterman...but Kamela?...not really, blank, pretty smile.

It sucks and is unfair, but that's life. Democrats have to run and please rational voters. Republicans just have to inspire crazies with empty promises, no results, and pretty much all end their run with a recession.

They just want to justify tax breaks for the wealthy by saying 31% of Americans will benefit...when in reality, only 2% or less truly get more than they lose from a typical Republican tax cut. Nope, those tariffs are not failing!!! Look, more people are getting wealthy!!! No need to look into tax reform or making sure billionaires pay more!

Kewl insult. Do you have an explanation?...or are too lazy to justify your comment?

Also, your logic is stupid. I'm not authoring the goddamn page, I am just trying to buy a product or do some research or use an app. I have no choice in the tooling someone else uses.

Also, it's not the defacto standard for full stack development. That's wishful thinking on your part so you'll not have to open a book and learn another language. Java still has greater penetration among anyone who has a budget and knows what they're doing. At best, node.js replaced PHP, which was always the low-budget entry-level language. JavaScript is an absolute shit language for server-side unless you move to typescript...and even then...why bother? Java performs far better, has a larger community, more penetration, and is just a better platform. My hope was the AI revolution would lead to less Python and JavaScript where they don't belong. In the browser?...well, it's basically the only option. Node.js was just a means of making users suffer so UI professionals wouldn't have to learn a superior technology. Hopefully, they can just vibe-code some Java until they can afford to hire a real professional. With typescript?...OK, at least they addressed the reliability aspect....but yeah, you're adding the same amount of complexity as Java, only noticeably slower and less scalable and efficient.

And if you're like most professionals I've talked to, I'll anticipate you taking offense at my comment. I'll prematurely respond to what I anticipate your response to be: You may be AWESOME at writing node.js services and write perfect tests and create works of beauty. The problem is you'll be rewarded with a promotion and your app will get handed off to someone more junior.

I inherited one (I'm definitely junior at node.js), it imported a Google lib, which needed a security update to the latest version. They completely rewrote the signature of every function. That's shitty of Google...but it is what it is. If it were Java/C#/Rust/C++/Go? It would be a 1h task to fix. The compiler would catch every error. Not only would Java catch every error in my code I wrote, it would catch every signature error in every lib I imported very quickly, typically on startup. Node.js? Oh, it starts. It will only catch the simplest errors on request.

OK. So here I am with an app I don't understand because the original author rage quit. Her wiki is horribly out of date, just like every wiki page I've written...we're all guilty of that! So I have to guess the functionality. I know what everyone else knows. But had a nice multi-day trial and error of testing every function point to check for missed signatures. Turns out she wrote shit unit tests, which honestly...many devs do...so the builds passed. It ended up being a 2 week ordeal because a whole batch were caught in production, by users, because of some undocumented functionality that was added in later.

If it were typescript? I think it would have found it. If it was Java, I know it wouldn't have passed the build. When you're the only author? You can do whatever you want with whatever you want. If work for a larger employer and have real teams, you cannot rely on your talent alone. That's why dynamically and untyped languages are usually inferior choices for corporate development.

However, the core complaint is not about node.js....that's between you and your hosting-env/hyperscalar. My problem is MASSIVE complex websites that render simple static content, yet make 100s of REST calls to build a page in a real-time on my client...rather than just build the final page...save it somewhere. And to your point, it's not JavaScript's faults that there are idiots out there. However, the community certainly seems to be embracing and encouraging all sorts of complexity and frameworks.

Every front-end-dev I've talked to as well as the ones I work with daily will tell you that you need many modern frameworks in your work product in order to stay employable....specifically meaning if you write a simple HTML page with simple minimal JavaScript, the first guy who sees your page will tell your boss you're a clueless moron who doesn't know his way around React/Vue.js/Angular/Svelte...not that you do know your way and thought they were a fit for larger projects. So let's add 100 dependencies in your build and many frameworks....so people know you know what you're doing. So now the user has this slow page and gets to watch it rerender in real-time on his page...making it challenging to know when it's fully loaded and having links and buttons move around on him/her...I've many times accidentally clicked the wrong function on an app because it moved the buttons around in the time between when I position my mouse and click.

But to the OP's original, this is not about Java. This is fully about JavaScript...and more precisely, misuse by JavaScript. It's just a tool. It's the author's fault the page is a mess and horrible time to use.

All your complaints? They're not Java. Java kept in it's own little sandbox. Java applets sucked and were solution looking for a problem outside a few novelty browser games. However, Java has been absent for browsers for almost 20 years. All the vendors removed support 10 years ago now. It began a very steep decline once the iPhone was introduced and Apple refused to support it.

Java has been a server side technology since the early 2000s. It doesn't even render HTML very much any more. It only processed backend-requests....far more quickly and efficiently than it's competitors. Your complaints are about JavaScript! It's a shitty language, but even moreso, abused by morons who don't follow common sense.

To this day, I still don't understand why they want to load 100s of scripts remotely and make 100 REST calls to render a page that's not even tailored to the specific user. Back in the server-side rendering days, there were a lot of jackasses, but at least the page rendered remotely and was sent when it was done...you can switch tabs and return once the tab said the page was loaded.

Loading a webpage shouldn't bog down a $4000 MacBook Pro...but the shitty front-end dev community said "M4 should easily be able to load my stupid and simple website?"...."Challenge accepted!"

It's almost as if the front-end community likes their users to suffer with their horrible billion level JavaScript frameworks that in the end, render a very dull page. Resume-Driven-Development at it's finest!

I've been into working out since I was a child...was born with the obesity gene and have to workout hard to be less of a fatty. Now all the execs are into biohacking, fitness, MMA, etc and won't shut up about it...quoting Huberman, Attia, and everyone else on Rogan. The most obnoxious is Pavel Tsatsouline...if another annoying exec talks to me about kettlebells, I'll fucking throw one at him.

It's fucking depressing...these guys used to see the hope and promise in technology and devices and making the world a better place with our actual skills and making small details of our life better. Now they're more excited by pipe dreams of longevity, flirting with MAHA beliefs, and largely unattainable dreams and wishful thinking of immortality and looking like male models while being tech execs and engineers.

Some of it is personal...I liked not having many coworkers at my gym, my quiet space, that thing that made me a little different...and I don't like being gym-splained by someone 1/4 my size in hallway conversation. But on the bright side, it brings costs down for protein powder and lots of new research into performance enhancing drugs.

That aside, what is additionally depressing about AI, if it actually worked, is they cede their skills to this magic box. Instead of solving their problems, they want the AI to do it for them, like their mommy. But regardless, 8 years ago, we were all trying to build things, with our skills, to make the world a better place. Now most of us are unsure how much longer our jobs will be relevant...and instead of building tangible change with tech, like clever devices, they're escalating to impossible dreams...AGI, eternal youth, drugs that mimic exercise (yeah, there is a promising one being evaluated), and whatever bullshit MAHA fans are pushing.

Is it a coincidence that every AI advocate I know was pitching bitcoin and wouldn't shut up about it 8 years ago? Did they "surrender" their cognitive abilities or never have them in the first place? I work for a large company that has gone all-in on AI. We've used ML models for decades legit reasons in our products for decades. We've given every programmer a generous amount of LLM AI time with all the major vendors. About 10% of the AI users are religious advocates...meaning that they won't shut up about the wonders of AI, but are talking about fictitious AI, not Claude or OpenAI.

AI is now a religion. Instead of being evaluated logically for the pros and cons, it's being evangelized based on pretend promises. The advocates are telling you how AI will bring in a brave new world of a glorious future and they're riding it. Realists, like me, use AI...are happy when it works...but also notice when it fails...which is pretty often. At work, I have to be quiet about it because I'm over 40 now and the advocates tell management that doubters are just dinosaurs who lack the intellectual capacity to embrace LLMs.

My response is, I'm not telling you that Claude writes shit code...the compiler is....because the shit it generated doesn't compile...the runtime exploding because Claude has no fucking clue what it's doing is saying it's shit code. People who use your products say it's shit because it is breaking on them and often quite slow

I've known some of these guys for over a decade, sometimes at past jobs or from school. They were always a bit delusional and optimistic. About half of them are dumb as shit and the other half just suspend reality...imagine the world of tomorrow instead of their deliverables today. The majority fell for the bitcoin bullshit. I don't think that is a coincidence.

From day 1, I knew something wasn't right with bitcoin. It honestly reminded me of EJB. So many were telling me bitcoin and EJB were amazing, but I'd respond with what I thought was the most logical question...OK, so when do I want EJB vs everything else?...or when is bitcoin better than current monetary systems? No one could give me an answer as to when to use one vs the other. They'd tell you how it works...but I don't care about how. That's fun trivia. I care about when...when do I do it this way?...when do I do things the old ways? In both cases, the answer neither...they're both expensive catastrophic solutions looking for a problem that caused huge, tangible damage to the global economy.

If you view AI as a tool that may or may not help you, you're an intelligent rational human being. If it's your religion?...well, you're just like the Scientologists, only with less sexual abuse. At least the Scientologists are getting laid.

An alternate theory...they need GLP-1. Say you're James Marsden (Cyclops from X-Men and a TON of other small roles). You're well liked, a familiar face, but not a household name. Your whole thing is being handsome. No one wants James Marsden with a dadbod. If he was a software engineer?...a small gut would be normal and fine at his age. However, he needs to take his shirt off....even if he doesn't?....he doesn't want to risk getting out of shape because the next role may want him hanging out at a beach or doing a nude scene.

He makes a fuckton of money based on looking nice...so perfect hair, plastic surgery on the face, every male beauty treatment under the sun, every performance enhancing drug. Literally millions of dollars are at stake...even if he doesn't need the money, he probably has a small staff: an assistant, a nanny, a housekeeper. He's a small business, not a person.

I'd have no problem taking whatever drug needed to provide for my family and even the people depending on me. GLP-1 drugs are well studied and thusfar, quite safe. I am on one myself...the short-term side effects suuuuuck...but regardless....I don't think most actors are using this as a shortcut. If they can be lean without it, there'e no sense in being miserable with an upset stomach 2 days a week.

However, if they need a bit extra...it makes perfect sense. Top actors are professionals. They are willing to go above and beyond for a role...because if they don't, someone else will.

But regardless, just because some abuse it, doesn't mean it's OK to act with contempt to the drug. People like me do need it to get below 30% bodyfat. I think 30% is below most health major complications, like diabetes and heart disease, but does lead to worse sleep and joint pain. Going from 30 to 15 would make the last 20 years of my life a lot nicer and more productive.

Metabolism isn't deterministic. Your body has stores of fat, muscle, and tissue it can break down at will. 4 years ago, I started intermittent fasting. I carefully controlled my calories, worked from home, and ate the same food every day...just for time sake. I lost about .5 lb a week on average. I was working out nightly. I went from 240 to 195. Then it stopped...same calories in....same level of fitness and working out....now the weight started creeping up. Because I'm not a moron, I tried working out harder...cutting calories...that slowed the gain. Any mistakes led to a large gain. It's not deterministic. If your theory was correct, it should be simple to reduce calories in and increase calories out and still see fat loss. But...it wasn't. Many have experiences similar to mine.

OK, so maybe I'm a jackass?...and lying?...well, it happens to everyone in my family. It's genetic. No one in my family has ever been skinny, even as kids.

But that's me. The point is metabolism is an extremely complex multi-variable equation and your experience won't match mine. I know guys from high school and college that never worked out and lived off pizza, beer, and cigarettes and stayed slim. EVERYONE knows some guy like that. I know middle aged men who are like that (except the smoking because the 2020s are different than the 90s). They don't work out and eat whatever they want and they're a reasonable, consistent weight. Any EVERYONE knows some woman in her late 30s or older who seems to always do everything right and is always struggling.

Your fallacy is to assume what is true for you is true for everyone. I've never gotten a cavity and I just brush and see the dentist...mediocre flosser, etc. I know many who are FAAAR more diligent than I and they've had many. It's not deterministic. My teeth are not healthier because I am more responsible. I am responsible and lucky. They're even more responsible and unlucky.

I know throwing around words like thermodynamics makes you feel smart and superior and witty...but you're just fucking wrong...and you know this. What's true for you and your friends will not work consistently for everyone. If it was...I am confident obesity would see similar patterns to drug abuse.

Overeating is a vice...but so is drinking and drug use. Many abuse all sorts of substances. They try to get clean, it takes much longer than it should, but by the time they're 60, most are sober and clean. They succeed within 5-10 tries. Every fat person has tried a dozen different diets. They kinda work for a bit until they don't. If it was just pizza dips, getting skinny would be about as difficult as quitting smoking.

Talk to any expert. There are massive differences in hunger signaling and GLP-1 has really illustrated this. If your body is not telling you went to eat, you're going to have a hard time keeping a healthy weight. You ignore your body for too long, it goes into starvation mode and you end up overeating because you're fucking ravenous and a billion hormones are telling you to eat. Tirzepatide stopped the noise for me. I still have to wait until I'm dizzy, but at least I don't have a ton of noise when I wait too long.

A lot of my ancestors are white...and from cold areas. Just remember, not that long ago, evolutionary speaking, having a body that was eager to store fat may have been the difference between surviving a winter and not. It make senses from a biological perspective. However, rather than guessing evolutionary advantages, you need to accept...your experience won't precisely match mine or anyone else's.

So, while the majority may be fat from reckless behavior, the rest of us who aren't strongly resent the stigma and oversimplified bullshit that old people love to dish out.

I know 2 women in their 40s who died of lung cancer, never smoked...ran marathons, ate like saints...both were white collar workers, so weren't exposed to fumes...sometimes genetics just suck.