It will take a few years until scheduled data center construction finishes, and together with software optimizations that may come up in the meantime, it may cause a significant decrease in token price.
5,648 karma · joined March 31, 2021
How do you make sure that whoever makes that choice makes it in a way you yourself will agree with?
What? How does this not show willingness to insult Musk?
Where did you observe the bias? Can you share any example of the conversation or post by Grok?
As an everyday user of AI, both at work and privately, I am not that convinced. The biggest effect I've seen so far is demand for faster work because "everything is faster with agents", but software quality is slowly dropping in software I see around me.
Current AI is very useful as a trivia engine and as a language manipulation tool - i.e. it can quickly extract information from a huge amount of text. But it still sucks when writing new things.
Admittedly, here has been much progress, but it seems to be slowing down. Money is drying out, models are getting nerfed, and only better scaffolding and workflows are making it better. Unless they build 100x more data centers, I don't see models getting significantly better.
Obligatory xkcd:
This concedes exactly the point I was making. You are stripping the word "God" of its established attributes (such as intellect, intent, and agency) and reducing it to a highly specific technical definition of a "self-subsisting being" or "first cause".
> "God" is the traditional name for this first cause.
This is a linguistic bait-and-switch. You cannot use a strictly literal, narrowed definition of a term to construct a logical proof, and then implicitly rely on the common interpretation of that same term to assert a broader reality. Labeling a mechanical first cause as "God" deliberately smuggles in the classical theistic baggage that your general observations about causality do not actually demonstrate.
Observing that change exists and positing a fundamental necessity for it does not prove a deity. Calling that fundamental necessity "God" is just a tautology designed to shield a religious premise behind sterile metaphysical jargon.
Prior to 0.9 (if I recall correctly), you had to install a plugin to be able to interface with LSP servers, and in 0.9 they integrated the support into NeoVim itself.
If you redefine God to mean "fundamental assumptions of the universe", its existence becomes tautological. But that is not what most people mean (including the author of the article we're commenting on) when they say "God".
If it were so, God's existence would be just another scientific fact.
A religious person - if not honest enough to simply say "existence of God is an axiom and cannot be derived from reason alone" - uses the very predictions of experiments to reason God into existence: everything that exists has a cause; universe exists; therefore universe has a cause.
I understand the use-case for this, but I find it working against the spirit of free software, which is bringing control back to the user.
I can't help but giggle at the fact that AI written project doesn't seem to get its home page right.
It's a useful tool and I built it myself, with my own ten fingers, using my brain. That's more than vibe coders will ever do.
Meanwhile, your blog says in big text "I don't care for the joy of programming", so I don't consider your opinions on software development anywhere near relevant.
If you can't tell AI slop from handwritten code, that's your problem. I won't censor myself because of your opinions.
I keep being impressed at subtle but meaningful things that Go does right.