7,548 karma · joined June 21, 2024
My guess is that people aren't abandoning their IDEs. Their market is probably growing. I suspect they're burning money on subsidized inference, just like everybody else.
That's how people start believing in supernatural explanations and conspiracy theories, though. Improbable events happen all the time; just because each event is improbable doesn't mean the set of improbable events that can occur isn't large.
Weird shit happens all the time, and we should expect it as a matter of random chance.
I don't think most people care about the engine that powers their browser. They care if it's fast, renders the sites they need, has a pleasant user interface, and doesn't crash.
A Gecko-based browser can do all of that.
FWIW, for me personally, particularly with newer versions, there has never been a moment when I felt Zen didn't fit on my Mac just fine.
That argument doesn't make sense to me. We elect people to work for us. They're not our parents; they're our employees. You have the relationship upside-down.
None of this has anything to do with voting on policies.
I'll cancel my OpenAI plan after this billing cycle. Let's see how this plays out.
It's not, I'm just pointing out that LLMs won't make that mistake.
You could ask an LLM what 1+1 is, and the number of times it says "3" is so small that it makes no sense to worry about it. It will phrase the response differently each time; that's the nondeterminism. But it won't say "3".
> then major question here is why are we building out huge amounts of infrastructure at unsustainable spending levels to enable LLMs to make the same mistakes as humans.
Yes, if we ignore everything else, that seems like a reasonable question. But let's not ignore everything else, like the fact that LLMs are much more productive than humans and likely already make fewer mistakes than the average programmer.
It must have been a huge shock when you were suddenly transported from a working parallel universe into ours back in 2024.
> If I give away food I have a duty not to poison you. It doesn’t matter you didn’t pay for it.
If I invite you to eat at my house, there is no health inspector and no government. I'm just giving you free food. Would you agree that I have a duty not to poison you in that case?
That's such an obvious category mistake that I'm not sure how to respond. It almost feels like a bad-faith interpretation of Wichary's original point.
Also, I feel like the LLMs would have done better if they had started from scratch each time, rather than being burdened by the output from the previous attempt.