0c3ca83

Would you be happier if I said "suggesting you shut up and take it"?

You're making a distinction without meaning.

We're working very hard to "enable agentic commerce", which is exactly that.

An appropriately dismissive response would be pointing an agent at this page and asking it to write a reply.

Anyone pushing the sloppification of the web should get exclusively the kind of interaction they wish for.

Out of respect for other readers on this site, I won't.

> AI is a tool wielded by humans. If we’re wiped out by AI, it will be at the direction of a human.

Being deliberately wiped out seems like it's mostly a misdirection away from the damage that's actually happening.

I'm sure some of the AI people high on their own supply believe it. And because the consequences are so negative, we should react as though the supposed experts were sane -- but I think it's a long shot that they are.

The bigger risk is that we end up in a rapidly enshittifying dystopia, treated as a cost center that needs to be optimized, and unable to competitively participate in the economy.

I have a number of successful AI investors in my social circle who are already placing their bets on a poorer and more disenfranchised humanity, with money going away from consumer tech, and towards a mix of B2B tech and policing.

Toys, sure.

It's usually not a good idea to build gas pipelines directly to your toys in the middle of a climate crisis.

It's like programming an overengineered DOS.

I too get better flavor from dog turds than rat turds.

Yeah, but all of the LLMs are a privacy nightmare, as is any Google product.

shrug seems fine, I guess.

What I would actually want is fat writes to default to uncached, which would harm performance but increase reliability.

The only time I interact with fat is on boot devices and pluggable media, which I want to unplug at any time.

Exactly, things were already bad, so why would anyone object when we make it worse?

I get it. I see the fire department is busy at work which means there's a fire nearby. Since things are bad, let's set the whole neighborhood on fire.

Why would you believe that?

> "real experts" are not always correct

That's why you should always hire someone unqualified.

Except the summary doesn't fucking work. It's consistently wrong.

What a repressed weirdo.

A collapse would be nice too.

No. But failing to loudly protest gives these companies license to continue.

What makes you think Google has built a profile that shows Claude is a vegetarian?

It is

If you can replace elements in a vector you can make elements unreachable.

The Linux kernel is simply not good quality code.

AI helps find vulnerabilities, but the way things are written were already fertile ground.

For money.

How about `x[i] = 7`? What if x is a vector of values that contain allocations?

> Not in every situation for all time, that's my point.

I disagree. It's not worth changing languages for new ones if you want to use AI, unless you can manage to create so much training data that it ends up baked into the models.

> Also, what you're saying implies Python and Rust should stop evolving as languages

Yes, much the way x86 assembly has stopped evolving for the user, outside of smallish additions like wider vector ops. Adding small, high value extensions extensions can be worth paying the token cost and increased failure rates if they add strong new capabilities.

If it's just ergonomic, it's a mistake, unless you want to target hand coders.

It's plausible, but also, AI systems have a long history of being plugged in on the wrong side of security boundaries.

Remember when you were able to take over any Instagram account by asking the helpful support AI to send a password reset to an email address of your choice?

> I assume the AI doesn't see them

Why?

Yes, Python or Rust would make sense to use as long as you're planning on sticking with LLMs.

This only works if you make every allocation its own plane, and scope all borrows to the lifetime of the plane, with a move terminating all borrows, at which point this is equivalent to rust, just with confusing jargon.

you can ask ai to write code in existing languages with large training sets, and it'll do better because of the large volume of training data.

if you're all-in on ai, you want to prioritize familiarity for agents.

how does that prevent use after free? pretty sure your algorithm is either very poorly explained or doesnt' actually work.

And what about allocations and threads?