Speak facts. Don't hide behind morality this, care that, environment and virtue signalling... Tell me, what is the factual things Grok model does wrong and is factual incorrect?
1. intelligence to token-use ratio is much better than the frontier models
2. hallucination rate is MUCH lower than OpenAI, Google and Deepseek models
3. the cost for output tokens is much lower than Anthropic models while near same intelligence and task completion
4. task completion time and success is on par with Opus 4.8 Max, but 3.5x less time used
Especially 2. you're probably more willing to allow OpenAI to bankrupt your morality, than face the facts of the model itself
Overall, Grok models are more factual and less politically influenced than OpenAI ones.
Still to this day I don't understand how people manage to do software development on a Windows PC. I started with my first secondhand MacBook which was one before the unibody, and then upgraded to unibody and never have left ever. The only reason I was forced to use Windows was for clients that didn't have support for MacOS or Linux. The only thing I need Windows for is rootkit enabled games... which pains me, otherwise I'd have Linux on my desktop
I had the feeling that Cerebras only supports smaller modes. Maybe something to do with their hardware arch? I never dove into it. I wanted to use Kimi K2 fast for coding and Groq was the only fast provider at the time
The nice thing is that adding this to the basic prompt that cursor uses will advance all those users and directly do away with this problem only to discover the next one. However, all these little things add up to a very powerful prompt where the LLM will make it only easier for anyone to build real stuff that on the surface looks very good
Don't underestimate the amount of knowledge you don't have to perfect things. I remember building scheduling software in PHP in high school, because I just fixed problem after problem, and I was not limited by any form of knowledge. If I'd have to do it again, I'd be perfecting the architecture, refactoring everything every other week...
I’ve used something similar quite a long time ago called Jade. Seems to be renamed to Pug. Here’s a nice writeup with some examples (not mine, found the webpage missing examples): https://www.sitepoint.com/jade-tutorial-for-beginners/
Why wouldn't they redistribute to other maintainers of the plugins/clients. They have much more knowlegde of where money is needed or where resources are lacking.
Or pay devs, not in their circle to build the features the community wants but they can't (lack of expertise, or otherwise) implement?
So hypocritical to say this and not resign yourself. Leave Google it’s choice and leave the company, don’t start destroying it from the inside, or stay and don’t speak your individual opinion
How is this different from Pothos, type-graphql or typegql? This announcement post doesn’t really have much to show for. I’d expect some comparison with other products that are on the market already
Really? I think they’re terrorists AND stupid.
Why else would they use funds from charity to build tunnels? Why else wouldn’t they build a local economy instead of investing in the daily rain of rockets on their neighbours? Why else would they launch a horrific attack against civilians at a “love and peace” festival next to the Gaza Strip in a country that’s a military powerhouse?
Other than complete delusion, it’s because they’re stupid… OR they don’t care about the well-being of their citizens and value the death of their opponents more than the live of their own
It's basically a functional programming language where functions can be applied to a type. The type is then passed as the first parameter. So instead of `afunction(param1, param2)` you would do `param1.afunction(param2)`.