Of course it's a bubble. Valuations are propped up by speculative spending and AI seems unable to make enough profit to make back the continued spending.

Now, that's not to say AI isn't useful and we won't have AGI in the future. But this feels alot like the AI winter. Valuations will crash, a bunch of players will disappear, but we'll keep using the tech for boring things and eventually we'll have another breakthrough.

Acquihire and hedging bets.

One of these is not like the others...

Odin vs Rust vs Zig would be more apt, or Go vs Java vs OCaml or something...

Have noticed Go/Rust/Zig are quite popular for self-contained natively-compiled network-oriented/system apps/utilities/services, and they're similar in their integrated compiler/package-management tooling. So for this use case that trio worths comparing.

Yeah, at this point why not have a Scratch vs Rust vs Python article?

Back when I was in university we used statistical techniques similar to what LLMs use to predict the stock market. It's not a surprise that LLMs would do well over this time period. The problem is that when the market turns and bucks trends they don't do so well, you need to intervene.

Second vote for Odin but with a small caveat.

Odin doesn't (and won't ever according to its creator) implement specific concurrency strategies. No async, coroutines, channels, fibers, etc... The creator sees concurrency strategy (as well as memory management) as something that's higher level than what he wants the language to be.

Which is fine by me, but I know lots of people are looking for "killer" features.

At this point it's not even OpenAI vs Google. It's OpenAI vs themselves. They're burning through more money making the models than they can realistically hope to make. When their investors decide they've burned through enough money it's basically over.

Google's revenue stream and structural advantages mean they can continue this forever and if another AI winter comes, they can chill because LLM-based AI isn't even their main product.

This is 100% it. In addition to MS Store, MS is trying to converge Xbox and Windows, which definitely had the potential to lock out Steam. SteamOS and hardware is 100% a hedge against that. And thankfully for us, Valve is moving quicker than MS.

If by turning the other cheek you mean threatening to try trademark IP he didn't create and use it as leverage to stop RubyCentral's potential legal action against him then sure..

Yeah, that's a red flag they didn't address. Other people raised a similar concern in /r/ruby but Joel called them an asshole & then edited his comment to hide the insult.

The US has a much stronger hand than Canada. The majority of our exports go to the US, but only 17% of US imports come from us.

For now, but that isn't immutable. Canada can build relationships with other nations instead. That's the neat thing about free trade.

As a Canadian, I do have to say that we've been putting up tariffs on trading partners' goods and protecting our shitty monopolies as long as I can remember, then whining when others do it back to us.

The situation in Canada is kind of messed up. We literally have trade barriers between provinces, tariffs on a ton of stuff, government protected monopolies and all that has lead to capital either being allocated poorly or allocated right out of the country. Even government pensions put most of their capital in US markets instead of in our own country.

While US tariffs on Canada will obviously lead to economic malaise, I can't say it's undeserved. Hopefully it leads to a wake up call here (it probably won't though, Canadians will just become more and more insular).

It's funny, we've been trying to forge closer ties with the EU and China but again, we are rebuked because we have tariffs on a bunch of their goods.

Also Canadian here. Have been closely following US-Canada trade for years. What you are saying is news to me. I am leaning towards believing you are simply mistaken, but if you have specific evidence about these two assertions, I would love to study them:

> tariffs on a ton of stuff

> we are rebuked because we have tariffs on a bunch of their goods

I can guess why one might think some of this (tariffs on Chinese EVs directly led to agricultural counter-tariffs from them and dairy trade barriers have always been a source of frustration), but in general, Canada's tariffs and barriers are by all indications in line with peer countries (US, UK, EU, Australia, etc.) and not particularly noteworthy. If you have concrete evidence to the contrary (not just that some trade barriers exist between Canada and its trading partners, but that they are out of the ordinary and much higher than other countries'; and that the world, in particular EU does not want closer ties with us because of them), I would love to study your sources and update my understanding.

I don’t think Canada has tariffs notably higher than other countries.

Sure, specific sectors and certain quotes but all countries have those.

>As a Canadian

Didn't take long to discover that your "as a Canadian" is actually "as a hyper-partisan Alberta separatist that thinks oil is all that matters".

Kind of gave up the game when you said this nonsense: "we've been putting up tariffs on trading partners' goods".

"It's funny, we've been trying to forge closer ties with the EU and China but again"

You really, really have no idea what you're talking about.