165 points•sidcool•1 day ago•139 comments•

139 comments

patcon1 day ago
I'm not sure this is even conceivable, but... Imagine the bootstrap problem of intelligence systems going down, when no one knows how to bring them back up without the system itself walking them through it... Like if power and intelligence were to go down in a Carrington-class event in 10 years...

Like what would happen to individuals ten years from now who are trying to live if AI suddenly became inaccessible

Of course we all know most humans are useless and unable to survive outside our culture, but the difference is that I'm trying to picture is the individual trying the reason through challenges. The version of this that has been obvious to me up to now is that the individual didn't have the knowledge to look after themselves. But I guess it feels different to conceive of them not having the ability to fully reason on their own...?

To not just lack the objects of intelligence, but the very process of it...

joebig1 day ago
The general drove on. "At the present time our chief bottleneck is the fact that missiles are limited in intelligence. The computer controlling them can only be so large, and for that reason they can meet the changing nature of anti-missile defenses in an unsatisfactory way. Few missiles, if any, accomplish their goal, and missile warfare is coming to a dead end, for the enemy, fortunately, as well as for ourselves.

"On the other hand, a missile with a man or two within, controlling flight by graphitics, would be lighter, more mobile, more intelligent. It would give us a lead that might well mean the margin of victory. Besides which, gentlemen, the exigencies of war compel us to remember one thing. A man is much more dispensable than a computer. Manned missiles could be launched in numbers and under circumstances that no good general would care to undertake as far as computer-directed missiles are concerned . . ."

We don’t even need to imagine that world, Russia is doing it today.

Missiles and ammo are too expensive, so they send people to run at the enemy, revealing their firing positions. Then they drone the people who revealed themselves.

If I was an AI, I would reason that a T-800 is far more valuable than a man soldier who I must feed and clothe and heat. Use the disposable soldiers first and save the robots for later.

GeoAtreides1 day ago
>A man is much more dispensable than a computer

sloppy (that is, negligent) writing. Something is either (in)dispensable, or is not. Either use something that can take degrees of comparison, like valuable (A man is less valuable etc) or reword it: A computer is indispensable, a man is not.

cheschire1 day ago
I was unfamiliar with the short story “The feeling of power” but thought for sure that “graphitics” must’ve been an Asimovism
I'm not sure what this quote is from, but I almost down voted you in disgust before realizing that was exactly the intended effect. In other words, "Thanks, i hate it"
sdcfgy1 day ago
Some of us are here to help. $1000/hr.
DrammBA1 day ago
Joke's on you, after the AI economic collapse in a few years $1000 will have the purchasing power of 50 cents of today's money.
9999000009991 day ago
Sounds like a bad novel. In the year 2050 no one knows how to actually program anymore. Then ClaudeGPT by GoogleSoft goes down. A 74 year old former software developer is on his farm tending to hens.

A self driving car crashes into his barn.

Out comes out a tech bro, “Yo OG programmer bro, it’s all busted bro, could you like make it unbusted bro.”

Then again with social security set to go bankrupt it’s not like we’ll be able to retire

edf131 day ago
A few of us old boys can still maintain Cobol
lbrito1 day ago
A safer currency and rate would be $1MWh/hr
Bluestein1 day ago
Talk about a #MeToo movement :)
sigbottle1 day ago
I think the reason that intelligence is so scary is how contextual, stateful, path-dependent, and coupled it is.

Which doesn't seem like it. The ideal is to keep removing couplings. But in practice, I find that focusing on the statefulness, the distribution-specificness, these "accidentals", is how you actually get leverage.

The obvious social consequence is now the tendency towards centralization, tyranny, "you people can't think for yourselves, not because you have some kind of 'inherent intelligence defect', but because the world is so complicated and interconnected that only coherent systems thinking (conveniently administered from one central point) is what can save you". In the Enlightenment world, the ideal was that every man could in principle, think for themselves.

A good ending might be that everybody benefits each other by distributing intelligence, but in practice centralization always seems to win.

Aboutplants1 day ago
This is why it will be more important than ever to have experienced, quality employees.

I dare companies to gamble on running their businesses on absolute skeleton crews long term

chasd001 day ago
yeah this was the devops promise too. Enterprise evolved into dedicated teams to manage AWS and other infra, instead of reducing headcount it raised it. so it goes.
Keep an offline copy of Qwen or something together with a knowledge base. Easy if you plan ahead.
TomGarden1 day ago
Yeah seems unlikely we'll be without at least a baseline level of AI unless we entirely run out of energy and components
netdevphoenix1 day ago
Imagine having a bunch of Claude agents doing time sensitive work and this happens and now a single human needs to pick up several 8k PRs authored by bots that can't talk to you now. Not sure how effective it would be to switch models using OpenRouter and the like given that, as the Earendil guys said, there is a lot of session detail that the provider doesn't share. The uptime is really going to cap their market penetration imo.
Alifatisk1 day ago
> Imagine having a bunch of Claude agents doing time sensitive work and this happens and now a single human needs to pick up several 8k PRs authored by bots that can't talk to you now.

8k diffs PR is incredible, is it even sane for a human to comprehend that much?

There has to be a name for such scenario were the handoff from Agent to Developer is so difficult, its not even worth pursuing but to instead wait until the Agent comes back online.

No matter how good of a developer you are, we are still constrained to our minds working memory. Lots of people I have spoken to are aware of this. Agents produce lots of diffs in a fast pace, our minds don't get the time to grasp the changed logic. And then, we an Agent is unavailable all of the sudden, say in the case of it being an outage or usage limit reached, the human now have to go through massive amounts of changes. They cannot continue as usual, there is a spike, they have to learn the new changes and grasp everything before they can continue towards the goal.

dannyw1 day ago
If you're not using Codex and Claude at the same time, you're missing out heaps. Even without outages, OpenAI models are great reviewers for Claude; and vice versa.

Other than trivial PRs; everything I do with Opus/Fable gets reviewed by Astra; and everything I do with Astra gets reviewed by Opus/Fable.

Using only models from a single vendor, is like testing your website/webapp only on Chrome.

pruzicka1 day ago
In my workflow, I still struggle to employ both providers in a way that makes sense and doesn't require me passing data or prompts between the two.

Could you share a bit more about how you do it?

dingaling9111 day ago
There is zero evidence for this "use multiple models" trope, IMO.

It's just feelings.

sarjann1 day ago
Never thought of it, but knowing that they encrypt reasoning is it possible that they share the decryption keys with other cloud providers like GCP Vertex / AWS Bedrock?
cbhl1 day ago
They don’t even share the reasoning keys between *models in the same model family*.

Opus isn’t even allowed to decrypt thinking blocks from Fable if you switch models mid-conversation.

https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/preser...

tekacs1 day ago
They don't, no (last that I looked) – if you switch providers, encrypted reasoning no longer works.
chinathrow1 day ago
The NSA wants a word.
maxcb1 day ago
> now a single human needs to pick up several 8k PRs authored by bots

PRs shouldn't really be reaching 8k diffs no matter who authors them.

Iolaum1 day ago
Given that CI is turning out to be a bottleneck - and a real pain for chainedd PR's - I have my hesitations on this.
reaperducer1 day ago
PRs shouldn't really be reaching 8k diffs no matter who authors them.

There's an ocean between what "should" happen and what actually happens in tech today.

psyphy21 day ago
can't you say the say with imagine "power goes out" or the "internet goes out"?

(but yes if AI is going to propagate, they need to fix their uptimes)

lxgr1 day ago
Neither electricity, nor the Internet is provided by one or two organizations globally, both with a blast radius that quite often takes out all of their services.

Not sure how long the latter will remain true – centralization is well underway there; try not to think of Cloudflare too much...

No, you can't. Because power or internet doesn't go out globally.
SupLockDef1 day ago
No worries, coding is solved they said in February 2026!

Isn't that a good news!

PhearTheCeal1 day ago
anyone can buy a backup generator for power
StrLght1 day ago
Coding may have been solved, but uptime remains a mystery.
dehrmann1 day ago
You can get away with a lack of rigor in software engineering (from both humans and AI agaents) because it's often cheap to try it and see. Once you get to operating the platform, it changes, and operational decisions need to be made carefully and code needs to be deployed carefully.
mrguyorama1 day ago
Oh no, you can pretty obviously just keep pushing out slop that only half works. Your customers will grumble and eat it like the peons your C suite thinks they are.

For whatever reasons, customers just buy trash nowadays, put up with trash, ignore horrifying contract terms, buy more trash, grumble about the trash, and then invest more in the trash.

It will be the death of us.

diegoperini1 day ago
May I steal this quote as if it's mine? :bow:
scrollop1 day ago
It's on the internet now, inside the bellies of 1000 llms.

It's everyones.

Iolaum1 day ago
Why do you need to say it's yours to use it? :p
dv_dt1 day ago
You are trained now, it must be yours
0xbadcafebee1 day ago
Unfortunately, not a mystery; it's management. As a syseng I can build you a 100% reliable system. But it'll fall to pieces when "Management" takes away our power to require change control, quality control, guardrails, rollbacks, performance testing, system limits, least privilege, etc. Any time you see a big company go down, it's because nobody was willing to enforce what's needed for reliability.
jjordan1 day ago
Given the amount of usage I'm now getting from Opus 5.5, I'm surprised it took this long since release for their first outage. In my experience, it's about 10x the usage of Fable 5.1 with similar, perhaps greater levels of intelligence.
Yeah, Fable 5.1 just seems Pareto-dominated. Opus 5.5 is the first model that feels like a step change for me, personally since like 4.6
copperx1 day ago
Exactly, 5.5 is the first model that I used that's better than 4.6.
Fable5.1 is Speedy
TheqO1 day ago
Anthropic yesterday: We have perfect AI agents to do everything now, value us at $100 Trillion

Anthropic today: We don't really have AI agents, they are glorified versions of automation scripts and one has broken today. But tomorrow we will have perfect AI agents, so still value us at $100 Trillion.

skohan1 day ago
A more cynical version of me could imagine scheduling an outage to make people think about how dependent they are on your product in advance of the IPO
spyspy1 day ago
The good ol' Fastly approach. Have your stock pump after you go down because no one had any idea how many websites depended on you.

Read the full thread on Hacker News →

Related stories