The argument made is reductive, as it confines itself to pure LLMs. It ignores the possibility of an LLM as a component of a robotic body, for example. While technically much more complex than Claude Code, a multi-modal LLM coupled with memory, sensors and a self-initiated motor facility could be implemented within an analogous execution loop. Roger Penrose and Stuart Hammeroff would still object to the possibility of human-like consciousness emerging from such an embodied LLM, but consciousness is potentially a continuum of awareness capability.
Their stock is up something like 1500% since IPO. I can't imagine most employees there feeling like they're undervalued with that sort of equity valuation.
Agreed, that is huge for the ecosystem. I have a side project actually that has a unified codebase: central library and api server in clj, and the cli client is babashka.
I am a fan of Christophe Grand's xforms library -- https://github.com/cgrand/xforms -- I find the transducer nexus function, by-key, to be particularly useful for eliminating clojure.core destructuring dances when one needs group-by with post-processing.
Free Monads are a very nice (though not performant) way of creating an embedded domain specific language interpreter.
Once I was building a declarative components library in PHP, using the ideas I've learned from free monads. I'm sure you can't imagine what an attrocity I've built. It did the job, but I had to mentally check out and throw in a couple of goto's in my main evalution loop.
All that to say that elegance of expressivity is tied to the syntax and semantics of languages.
Free Monads are also built on a tower of mathematical structures that come with laws and invariants. I have yet to see such formalization for transducers.
reply