Surely mapping also helps reducing the time it takes to achieve the task?

A robot vacuum isn't time constrained. It literally has all day.

They make noise, and people remote, so that might not be the case.

In addition, more working time equals more wear and tear for parts.

That's what these providers want as well, but from the other side. They want to know that a customer won't be able to eat more than certain number of servings, as they need to pay for each of those servings.

It works out even if some customers are able to eat a lot, because people on average have a certain limit. The limits of computers are much higher.

Fair, and I think openclaw and all the orchestrators are having agents maxing out the plans. So maybe they figure out a new tier that is agent-run vs human-run. Agents are much more insatiable, whereas humans have a limit. Not sure if it'd be possible to split between those two different modes, but I think that might address the appetite issue better.

I think it would be impossible to find the price point for a monthly subscribtion that would both be profitable to a provider, as well as attractive to the customer. If anything, as the customers would now be paying necessarily even a higher amount for agentic use, they'd make certain they'd be using the agent as effectively as they can, meaning it would be even more costly for the provider.

Pay-per-token is really the only way it can work. If some kind of fixed monthly price is desirable, then there should be a quota the user can assign, and then the agent could e.g. slow itself down by 50% when 50% of the quota is spent, another 50% at 75%, etc, to make it last longer..

As a side thought, I wonder how it could affect an agent's behavior if the information of this token usage/limit was brought to it..

Ironically in chatting with Gemini, helped me realize that telecoms have often solved this problem of unlimited usage with rate/speed limiting. If one goes over 10GB or whatnot of data, then the speed drops from 5G to 3G, and data remains unlimited.

I wonder if there could be something like that, maybe even a progressive rate limiting, where after a certain number of tokens or another metric of use, then the speed slows down a LOT.

Not saying that I would love that as a consumer, as I'd prefer this all-you-can eat, unlimited data plan, but I wonder if that would be a compromise that could work, as it seems to have worked OK with the telecom space.

edit: the nerd in me loves the irony of me making the above comment and then later seeing your username as flux :-)

What I'd like to see would be some useful extra APIs in Wine, that would allow it to perform even better in some situations, and that such APIs would be then embraced by the game developers.

Finally some embrace, extend, and extinguish love right back at Microsoft!

That will never happen.

I know what an environment variable is, my question is why name them `UV_` instead of `FYN_`? I thought that would've been obvious for exactly the same reason you mention, it should be named for the application they belong to.

Ah, I completely missed the point of your question :).

Yes, I think that's a good point. Possibly they were made before the project name was changed and no further thought was given to them after.

There are the commands git request-pull and git send-email to work with that workflow, though.

Frankly I don't think one even needs to learn it, if you know a bunch of other languages and the codebase is good. I was able to just make a useful change to an open source project by just doing it, without having written any lines of Go before. Granted the MR needed some revisions.

Rust is my favorite, though. There are values beyond ease of contribution. I can't replicate the experience with a Rust project anymore, but I suspect it would have been tougher.

Keyboard arrows worked.

But this method is now spent, as if someone is determined on keep using LLM, this should be pretty easy to overcome.

I suppose though new methods could be devised, but it's not "certainty" that they will catch them.

That's not true. People still pick up USB sticks from the street, people still fall for scam phone calls and people still click on links in mail.

Just because a method was successful once does not mean it was 'burned', none of these people will be checking each and every future pdf or passing it through a cleaner before they will do the same thing all over again and others are going to be 'virgin' and won't even be warned because this is not going to be widely distributed in spite of us discussing it here.

If anything you can take this as proof that this method is more or less guaranteed to work.

It doesn't seem the actual serialization format is specified? Other than in the code that is.

Is it versioned? Or does it need to be..

Wow, I thought you were exaggerating, but no: https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3...

Open 80, closed 492.

That's basically just Zig, right? Re-invented C but only fixed the syntax, not the problems.

it’s hard to be convinced that zig is an acceptable idea for security critical runtime for web applications.

And as I understand it, most (if not all) of these segfaults were in casual use, not when someone is trying to attack it..