ako

I’ll agree with your last 3 words: they’re broadly similar systems - systems of deceit and self-deception. They may share the same god, but for 99% they’re different enough that they think they can kill one another and their god will approve, or even give them gifts. For 99% these religions are incompatible.

Exactly, and all Jews think Jesus is a fake. And on top of that all the past gods, Roman, Greek, Inca, Vikings, etc.

There can be more than one solution.

You forgot “we can stop climate change”…

Come on, it’s way more common than that. We’ve invented 3000+ gods and almost as many religions, most of them are incompatible with each other. So, most of these must be incorrect, so a huge amount of self-deception. But as Harari argued in his book sapiens, humans can be inspired to great things by stories, even if false. Self deception has served humanity in a big way.

There are plenty people that just turn on the radio or Spotify to have some random Muzak in the background.

No, for that money I can buy an iPhone and an iPad. Just checked, iPhone 17 256gb plus an iPad 13inch 256gb is about 100 euros cheaper than the cheapest iPhone duo.

Quality of life will be dramatically lower for many because we did not take action

Why does it matter? It’s like a named operation, and if you want local scope you can create CTEs, which is like an anonymous local operation. So you have both options.

Writing speed is not really relevant anymore, LLMs do it. Reading is what matters most.

1. Can be done using views. Creating named views is really not that different than building named functions or methods.

I thought you were supposed to eat the pudding?

Flipped classroom method?

This is not counter collaboration, collaboration can also benefit from the use of AI.

I see it differently: if you’re not willing to consider how you could be better/faster/more productive with AI, you’re unwilling to adapt to the future, and not flexible enough. You’re going to slow down your employer. Most business text does not benefit from a user spending time on phrasing it, it’s not literature.

As I said the response of AI is very much based on the input and context i give it. It’s not like everyone gets exactly the same answers from AI. Ai is a tool that I control.

Also, if the response of AI is sufficient, what is the added value of you spending more time on it?

If the response of AI is sufficient, why would i retype it in my own words? Just a waste of time. Most of what i have AI generate is based on my words and input anyways. I'll often write a draft note, and then have AI generate multiple formats, e.g., technical wording, marketing wording, management wording. Almost like taking raw content and using AI to rephrase it for specific channels.

Why are you so distracted by style? I see it too, it could be improved, it might be improved, but I don’t care as long as it get shit done. And it does, tons of shit gets done. And the communication is usually more informative than how coworkers document their work. Can it be improved? Yes. Does that mean I can’t use it? No.

Exactly, the German autobahn is also awesome. /s

Kitesurfing is so last decade, this decade is all about wingfoiling and parawinging.

Pagerank is just a popularity contest, doesn't say anything about trust. AI probably does a better job determining trustworthyness than pagerank.

Maybe, but it's reality. Not too long ago the rule would be "if it doesn't show up in google, it doesn't exist". Today agents+LLMs are better browsers than Chrome/Safari/Firefox/... If a webpage does not show up in an LLM it may as well not exist.

The best way to read the information on the internet today is via a LLM.

Just like you don't process raw data in a data warehouse or datalake by looking at tables, you use a SQL or BI tool, to process all the information on the internet you need to tool to digest it for you. For many, today that tool is a LLM chat interface or agent.

Go value proposition for me, when developing with Claude code: 1) fast compilation times, faster iterations, 2) user friendly to install, one single binary per platform, 3) feels safer than JavaScript/typescript, which have too many npm vulnerabilities. Go comes with more functionality included, less need to use 3rd party libraries.

We’re way beyond that, LLMs are used for reasoning - plan, do, check, act. They will define a goal, decide how to get the info needed (run a script for example), and use these new insights to adjust the plan. This is way beyond just retrieving info from a knowledge base.

And where the info comes from (scraped, or classroom books) does not influence if something is intelligent, Humans are also trained on pre-existing knowledge.

Real intelligence is being able to use your stored knowledge to solve new problems, which both humans and agents+LLMs can do to different levels.

Exactly, and a dsl gives you many options and tools to make the llm more reliable: a grammar enables deterministic syntax checker, error messages injecting correct syntax into the context, linting, terse examples in the skills for token optimization, and even the option to add the grammar to the llm to help it decide what next tokens are acceptable.

For open source llms you can give your grammar to the llm to help it decide what valid next tokens it can generate.

They don't need to, they can use tools to validate their assumptions.

I think the hard part is not the syntax itself but the shift in thinking: instead of procedural state manipulation expressing the desired end result in declarative set based relation algebra. I see developers struggling with breaking down complex queries in (inline) views / CTEs, thinking they need parameters, when things can be expressed as a queries on another query. Complaining about the lack of reusability, but not knowing about views.

Time to start using plsql, ADA with first class support for embedded SQL.