The permanence and effectiveness of every policy Trump declares is mediated by his attention span, its inherent legality, and his opportunity to profit from gatekeeping. I would be very surprised if this particular whim impacts model development in practice at all.
Advise you to listen to a recent Odd Lots podcast with Anjney Midha. It will be educational. The compute will be commoditized. Nobody has a monopoly on data. There are a zillion specialities of knowledge work to differentiate.
With what process, spec driven? Having AI produce all the code is pretty common. An agentic workflow operating at a higher level of abstraction especially for brown field is not.
OpenCode is a "harness" that manages conversations/interactions with LLMs. It does not run a model itself. An extended interaction can include- many turns of conversation, providing files for the LLM to process, having the LLM direct the running of programs called tools by the harness. The privacy aspect is determined by which LLM you configure OpenCode to use. If you configure it to use an LLM you host yourself, then you maintain your privacy. If you have it use an LLM provider you do not host yourself then your conversation and file and tool results and whatever else is sent to the provider and your privacy is dependent on the provider. There have been no reports of OpenCode communicating out of band with user data to any servers- it does do things like check for version updates and can download plugins and the like. But in that sense OpenCode is reasonably configurable for privacy. The default however is to use an external provider for LLM, not a local model, so you have to change that and not use it oob.
To have your own LLM provider, you have to run different software. Ollama is one option (though it also by default uses external provider) and llama.cpp is another. Jan and LMStudio are other options for actually running a model on your own hardware, to which you can direct OpenCode.
Tyler is an academic economist. He is accustomed to thinking about the magic of the markets. No consciousness there. Sure.
But the "market" is a human invention around which there also exists governance / regulation / accountability / responsibility. That these structures exist- even when people try to evade them- is the existence proof of the thing that the word intent refers to, and that there is a feedback loop incorporating the modeling of intent in human behavior is what consciousness refers to.
The existence proofs are there no matter how poorly Tyler argues against them.
I thought this reference was to skill files, which do rapidly become technical debt- so what was the rotting inventory metaphor? But no this is in reference to human skill acquisition around each of the different agentic platforms.
This misunderstands the power of monetization, or mistakes "dollars" having some kind of fixed "value." They do not. Whether one agrees with that or not, thinking of this as a "debt" problem where a hypothetical move is to appropriate equity- setting aside the fact that equity ALSO is not in a fixed unit of measure- anyway, thinking of appropriating equity to solve a public debt problem is a category error. That is how accounting works for business structures that exist within a monetary system but NOT for government and currency printers that define the monetary system. The MMT people are right about this. Public debt is a measure of private sector wealth. That is how the machine works.
This is not an HN worthy post but since it is here I really hope he executes on this plan, thus ensuring the instantiation of the "Markwayne Mullin effect" in the chronicles of pop culture. What exactly that will be- can only speculate. But it will be something. Airport owners do not eff around.
This is like a one shot prompt to build a space station, using 2 or 3 generations old exemplars. No offense but this is not something you should promise someone you can build ("production-tested stacks only") on your own if this the level of question in your mental model.