> The index demand is not 100% of the stock available in the IPO, or 110%, or even 50%. But it’s plausibly more than 25%. It’s not a short squeeze, but it’s a lot. Add a reported 30% allocation to retail, and arguably a majority of the IPO is being sold to price-insensitive investors. That is one way to get a high IPO price.
If the wrong CA issued a certificate then wouldn’t that show up in the transparency logs? It seems like by monitoring them, you could see if a security bug is being exploited.
It seems like if I were looking for software to do something specific, I might do a Google search, or ask an AI to do some searches for me. I wouldn't be interested in browsing this sort of website even if it had a lot more content.
Are there other people who find software this way? I've heard of Product Hunt, but never used it.
One thing this page makes clear is that do-syntax could mean all kinds of things, which seems like a disadvantage for readability. Assuming you know the specialized syntax, elvis operators looking different from async code or a nested for loop seems like an advantage? The performance implications are entirely different.
The logic of an arms race is that nobody controls the technology. For a literal example, Ukraine and Russia are locked in a drone arms race. Ukraine needs improve drones as fast as they can. There’s no getting off that train until the war is over.
This is starting to be true for AI and security bugs. Writing secure Internet-facing software will depend on AI security review. Anthropic can hold Mythos back for a while to buy some time, but the competition isn’t going to stop.
It’s also not always true that technologists think they should control AI. Some companies support legislation. But there’s not a lot of progress, so they end up making their own decisions in the meantime.
They could still form trade organizations to invent ground rules that members of the organization agree to follow, and then lobby for government to formalize those policies into broader laws that others also have to follow.
This strategy would also have the advantage that experts with skin in the game of their field and cutting edge experience get to choose, hone, and debate the policies before testing them so that out-of-touch elected officials don't have to do that step which would be parsecs out of their competence.
Unfortunately that would be a strategy that a real member of the real world might come up with to improve their product, their industry, their ability to create, and their relationship with the consumer. Instead we have nothing but parasites optimizing for gaming the quarterly numbers to pump and dump national institutions and building blackmail profiles against other powerful players to out-extort them while everyone involved tries to maximize how much blood they can suck.
You could be less selective with a high-turnover pool of temporary workers, something like an internship program. But that doesn’t mean anyone gets to be an intern.
Did you know that a Substack's author can turn the annoying popup off? Go to dashboard -> settings, and then it's "Enable subscribe prompts on post page" under "Growth."
I’m just kind of surprised that it works to convert people.
Or…maybe it doesn’t?
Some of these things that we have are just common practices that owners of websites do that are seemingly done automatically without much thought to the experience.
So I guess Google doesn’t think their stock is particularly cheap, but Berkshire Hathaway wants to buy more anyway. (At a slight discount.)
reply