There's a small minority of people who are adamantly refusing to change, such as there are in every technological revolution. Ego prevents them from even wholeheartedly trying the tool, because it would be admission they were wrong.
The opportunities available for these people are rapidly, rapidly shrinking. I believe it's possible to be a developer today who's EXCEPTIONAL and never uses AI. Most opponents are not exceptional, though, and even these opportunities are shrinking.
Most exceptional developers in my org adopted AI in their workflows and went from 10x developers to 20x developers.
If you refuse to adapt, you're going to be out of a job complaining about the kids and their newfangled technology REAL quick. You have a few years remaining, maybe less.
The EU will rely on US tech forever because it is literally not possible to create an EU alternative in that business climate. There are no major EU clouds, nor are there any major EU software services and there never will be because the EU is the worst place in the entire world for startups (try starting a company in Germany or France).
Absolutely, it can be encrypted all they want and it's totally irrelevant given all the plaintext chats get stored straight in Google Drive (if you didn't, your conversation partners did!).
Then for some reason WhatsApp has far more critical no-click or 1-click exploits than Telegram, which has 30 global employees? Huh? There's several thousand working on WhatsApp. Telegram has more features, too. WhatsApp has less surface area, more employees, more exploits.
Starbucks is shifting corporate jobs from Washington state to Tennessee as a result of this rhetoric. Chicago's financial industry was famously carved out due to the same kind of rhetoric, with Citadel moving to Florida, causing massive damage to the city and a huge financial hole (the city can barely fund the CTA, and it nearly collapsed in 2025).
You sure showed those billionaires by destroying the jobs of thousands of middle class workers and losing out on the tax revenue that was funding public transit and critical infrastructure. Nice!
Over the last 100 years the wealthy have expanded their gap between themselves and everyone else AND poverty rates have become the lowest at any time in history.
Seems to me that the status quo is allowing billions of the poorest people to afford food, shelter and more.
When you contextualize it that way, your argument looks like jealousy. For your argument to make logical sense, you must show that the poor are worse off than they were 100 years ago. But that's completely false. Extreme poverty was almost eradicated completely in that time.
You've got the 2nd wealthiest man in the world who created a company that sells essential goods at margins between 0 and 5%, far lower than typical 30% margins in retail. The poor have benefited profoundly from this, as their buying power has never been better (not to mention the lifts in living standards, wages, etc).
Even if it fails, California has taken a multi billion dollar tax hit from all of the wealth flight as a result of this. Not to mention that those people may take jobs with them, straight to Florida or Texas or other friendlier states.
These taxes are an abject disaster everywhere they're tried. France tried it and it was extremely bad for them.
The cash raised from the tax is dwarfed by the wealth flight, every time.
Napkin math for just the people who have left already over 5 years show $50 billion in lost tax revenue. Probably far more in indirect losses (jobs, consumption, etc).
Fable specifically refused to harden the security of codebases. If you use misdirection to force Fable to do just that, that's the removal of a guardrail.
Anthropic specifically stated that ANY security requests should be shunted to Opus 4.8. This was bypassable.
I don't see what your confusion here is. Fable was prevented from working on any security tasks. A significant amount of people, myself included, witnessed Fable refusing to harden code as a result. Bypassing that is a bypass of guardrails.
Your assertion that working on security is not working on security because you used misdirection is of course, preposterous.
You wouldn't be making the same claim if Fable refused to work on chemical weapons research but happily proceeded to do so if you claimed it was for eradicating pests.
What? Fable was designed to refuse to work on security issues, as Anthropic specifically confirmed. How is forcing Fable to work on things behind guardrails not breaking a guardrail?
This is Anthropic's own claim. They were very specific. Have you read their own claims?
What? I personally experienced Fable outright refuse to do ANY security-related tasks, including hardening code or modifying security-related features. That was a guardrail. It was bypassed.
Anthropic themselves specifically called them safeguards. [1]
"When Fable’s classifiers detect a request related to cybersecurity, biology and chemistry, or distillation, the response is automatically handled by Claude Opus 4.8 instead"
This is exactly what was bypassed. They got Fable to work on security topics.
Many made the same prediction about Twitter, and it seems to be more or less the same or higher activity than before, and Bluesky is continuing to rapidly decline (-5% DAUs per quarter).
I wouldn't bet on Musk, but I DEFINITELY wouldn't bet against him. Anyone betting against him over the last 10 years has been viciously smoked (many short-selling hedge funds got wiped out completely).
Why should any company acquiesce to a contemptible organization that ruined the web with useless cookie nag screens and is hellbent on banning encryption?
The EU has done severe damage to the security of the web by training users to click accept on nag screens like the EU-required cookie popups (83% click accept).
Brexit was a referendum on immigration. It was the number one issue. Yet, successive governments since Brexit have turned immigration up to 11. No wonder they think it's a failure, the will of the people was ignored (and it's having real political blowback, with both major parties about to get reduced to dust according to polling).
You just finished praising Steam, the company responsible for the proliferation of DRM technology that does exactly what you claim to hate.
If Steam goes offline, billions and billions of dollars of games go with it. The online ones, the offline ones, all of it. Gone forever. Some will not function at all without Steam servers.
Steam pioneered remote DRM attestations for PC gaming, remote product key validation, always-online dependencies on Steamworks and more.