I know right, just $13.8 billion is nothing, I tell you! It cost that much just to rebuild I-45 through Houston!

I'm thinking, more like $50.

To me, it doesn't matter what it costs to make the things. $50 is all it's worth...to me.

I hear it's popular these days to generate legal briefs with AI.

My question is, will Musk's lawyers use Grok for this, and will Altman's lawyers use GPT?

I mean, put your mouth where your money is!

Right! I guess the "distressed" look is in, these days!

...the Doomsday Clock.

We've all seen that car or truck with a random door or hood panel that's a different color from the rest of the car.

Now, picture an aging BMW with panels here and there no longer functioning, out of sync with the color of the rest of the car. Or worse, flashing haphazardly.

There is no way these panels will last as many years as the car itself.

Agreed, my experience with Gemini is similar.

In many cases, it actually does write code better than you yourself would. It follows your patterns, but it doesn't forget to do things like handle the possibility of null references, something I myself inappropriately skip on occasion.

It definitely writes code *faster* than you can. And that by itself is a big benefit.

Making jobs obsolete, seems like dystopian hype. To me, it's more like telling construction workers to start using power tools.

It's important to note here that Facebook isn't claiming they are cutting jobs because AI has made them so much more efficient, but rather, because they want to spend so much money on AI infrastructure, and there's not enough left over to spend like they used to.

My point was, their product is *actually* good.

Every business is in business to make money, and nearly all of them advertise their products. So that's not unique to OpenAI.

The latest coding models have moved beyond slop. They actually write decent code.

Just a few months ago, I used to have to micromanage every code change. These days, with GPT-5.4, it usually gets it right the first time, even larger code updates. It does a great job of following the coding patterns and conventions YOU demonstrate in your code base. It's actually not hard to read or...sloppy.

Sure, everybody touts their own products. But OpenAI has some reason to brag.

In my own comparison tests of coding LLMs, I've found Anthropic and OpenAI models superior. And OpenAI's are much faster, with similar results, than Anthropic's.

It's not *just* hot air.

No, that's not how conspiracy theories work. Conspiracy theories are conjecture based on assumptions that things "obviously" can't be what they seem. They don't "turn into" conspiracies. WTC towers were actually brought down by the government...that's a conspiracy theory.

Conspiracies, by contrast, involve specific people and specific events. Iran-Contra...that was a real conspiracy.

One does not morph into the other. And your example, wasn't actually a conspiracy theory. It's easy *now* to conjure "memories" of such a conspiracy theory, knowing the facts of the Epstein case. It's a form of false memories. (Or maybe I'm in on the conspiracy and trying to distract people's attention from what's really going on.)

Anybody can fork an open source repository. But not just anybody can keep it going. LibreOffice survives not because it got its code from Open Office, but because of the community that keeps it alive.

I think we programmers often obsess too much about who can see or get copies of our code, as if that were the magic sauce. It's not. It's the people behind the code, that is the magic sauce.