> LLMs are merely copying these decisions.

This I strongly suspect is the crux of the boundaries of their current usefulness. Without accompanying legibility/visibility into the lineage of those decisions, LLM's will be unable to copy the reasoning behind the "why", missing out on a pile of context that I'm guessing is necessary (just like with people) to come up to speed on the decision flow going forward as the mathematical space for the gradient descent to traverse gets both bigger and more complex.

We're already seeing glimmers of this as the frontier labs are reporting that explaining the "why" behind prompts is getting better results in a non-trivial number of cases.

I wonder whether we're barely scratching the surface of just how powerful natural language is.

In the enterprise deployments of GitHub Copilot I've seen at my clients that authenticate over SSO (typically OIDC with OAuth 2.0), connecting Copilot to anything outside of what Microsoft has integrated means reverse engineering the closed authentication interface. I've yet to run across someone's enterprise Github Copilot where the management and administrators have enabled the integration (the sites have enabled access to Anthropic models within the Copilot interface, but not authorized the integration to Claude Code, Opencode, or similar LLM coding orchestration tooling with that closed authentication interface).

While this is likely feasible, I imagine it is also an instant fireable offense at these sites if not already explicitly directed by management. Also not sure how Microsoft would react upon finding out (never seen the enterprise licensing agreement paperwork for these setups). Someone's account driving Claude Code via Github Copilot will also become a far outlier of token consumption by an order(s) of magnitude, making them easy to spot, compared to their coworkers who are limited to the conventional chat and code completion interfaces.

If someone has gotten the enterprise Github Copilot integration to work with something like Claude Code though (simply to gain access to the models Copilot makes available under the enterprise agreement, in a blessed golden path by the enterprise), then I'd really like to know how that was done on both the non-technical and technical angles, because when I briefly looked into it all I saw were very thorny, time-consuming issues to untangle.

Outside those environments, there are lots of options to consume Claude Code via Github Copilot like with Visual Studio Code extensions. So much smaller companies and individuals seem to be at the forefront of adoption for now. I'm sure this picture will improve, but the rapid rate of change in the field means those whose work environment is like those enterprise constrained ones I described but also who don't experiment on their own will be quite behind the industry leading edge by the time it is all sorted out in the enterprise context.

Non-technical home users in my circles are fed up with Windows 11's changes from Windows 10 without a suitable transition that eases them into the changes. They are nowhere near good candidates to migrate to any flavor of Linux, though. There are still plenty of sharp edges. So lots of cursing and griping at Windows 11 continues.

More interesting to me however, are the macOS technical friends in my circles. A trickle of them are switching to various Linux desktop distributions. This was inconceivable to me a mere 10 years ago. But I have to admit the quality of the Apple ecosystem has slid an astounding amount, which is driving the more advanced technical users into the arms of Linux. There are still plenty of Apple ecosystem-specific integration points and features that are still not available on Linux, like Apple Notes/iMessage/AirDrop/AirPlay/Handoff between macOS and iOS, system-wide kinetic/momentum scrolling, iCloud sync, system-comprehensive battery management that includes working sleep and suspend, advanced trackpad gestures, uneven Unicode support, uneven human interface guideline adherence, limited laptop LLM inference, etc. So I'm not expecting this trickle to turn into a flood soon, but the solid lock Apple used to have on developer mindshare is not as solid any longer.

With the Netflix infrastructure, I'm surprised they broadcast it so conventionally. Different channels running at the same time (with the crowd at the bottom, with the crowds as he passed each floor, with his wife watching, with pro climbers talking technical climbing stuff with simultaneous 8K online illustrating graphics, etc.), different audio tracks (with commentators, with crowd at bottom only, etc.*). Alex Honnold was paid only $500K for the event, so maybe there simply wasn't a lot of money allocated to the project to get fancy with the live broadcast.