c-linkage

There is a saying: no decision before its time. Management is making the decision to defer action until it is no longer a decision but a necessity. It's dumb MBA thinking, but I can probably guess the company you worked for is still around after Y2K and that they made a boat-load of money selling the new features instead of not selling new features and fixing the problem.

So what I'm hearing is that software quality will not improve without government regulation.

On the contrary -- AI would either replace you completely OR (more likely) allow you to produce more per unit time. There was never any thought or suggestion to reducing the total amount of time you would work.

It would have been nice if my siblings had the same opinion.

I agree with your assessment. If I want to use cash then I should be able to and at a cash price. If I want to pay with a card and that card come with transaction fees, convenience fees, and insurance fees (e.g. the card issuer east fraud) then I should pay for it, not the guy using cash.

It is my understanding that companies are forbidden from offering differential pricing for cards and cash. At the very least, prices on the shelf must include credit card processing fees in the base price. Sometimes small-time businesses will offer cash discounts, but most retail and grocery places won't.

Works only with iOS. I guess only people with iPhones rent houses for parties?

Everything on the internet is free. Everyone expects everything on the internet to be free. Therefore, everything is run on ads.

I think that is what they are actually looking for. Imagine: You have capital, you invest in a business that is run entirely by computers. You want to scale? Just provision more agents / cores. It's completely autonomous. It's a money printing machine that extracts revenue from customers, with no work required by the owner.

Frankly, the finance world has already achieved this -- they just lend money to make money, with no work involved. Regular businesses are jealous so now they feel they can use computers to do the same thing but in non-finance areas.

Your lack of creativity is not a reason to believe that a super AI is harmless or less destructive than a nuclear weapon. Damage need not be limited to destruction. Introducing doubt is sufficient. Right now you have faith that digital Financial transactions can be trusted. You have faith that computer encryption can be trusted. You have faith that digital certificates will protect you. If an AI can introduce doubt into any one of those systems, that will be sufficient to bring about the destruction of those systems. Imagine a world in which you can no longer use a credit card or Apple pay. Where no digital cash transaction can be trusted or validated. What effects do you think that would have on commerce? How quickly do you think we can return to some trustable means of commerce? Do you think it will happen before your groceries run out in your apartment? Before your grocery store can settle its debts? Before your Amazon ec2 instance runs out of credits?

What happens when a husband decides to risk the mortgage payment on a sports bet and loses? Now the wife and kids are evicted.

Or maybe he lives alone and is now homeless. But now we have a man living out of his car, or worse, homeless and begging on the corner.

The problem with allowing people to do whatever they want is that risks are often socialized.

Voters can be held accountable; he demonstrated exactly what he was the first time in office and then people voted for him again.

My suspicion is that HF specifically didn't pursue charges to set the precedent that use of AI absolves accountability.

A computer under control of an AI cannot be held liable. The lack of a law suit also leaves no ground for regulation.

The current admiration also wants these tools - warts and all - so nothing can be allowed to stall the progress of these war machines.

I still remember when Interstate exits in the US were numbered sequentially. It seems like only 20 years ago they switched to mile markers for exit numbers.

Start up a seti at home style of open source LLM training! Assuming there is an ability to merge the sub models trained on each user's home PC into a larger model...

I can't wait for The Truman Show to be real. This is the best future possible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43fqtIPGo2A

[flagged]

In my place of employment, anything I create while on company time or using company resources is the property of my employer.

So while it might be nice to say I won't share, boss-man can certainly make it so I must share.

I don't need to be able to write proofs about my maths using logic and determinism. If the answer comes out in a way that I like then it has to be correct!

Which shows the lie of the common engineering trope "use the right tool for the job."

It really should be "use the same tool that everyone else is using so you don't have decide which tool is the right one -- the herd made that decision for you!"

He probably had plans to use it for some sort of Ender's Game crap but then realized that grok wasn't smart enough to do it.

There are a few reasons that I can see why they don't integrate the latest .net.

First is that the security model changed with .net 5. Next is that they subsume Mono/.net core into the foundation of the language and this cost them them the ability to support Windows native development, specifically anything to do with Win32 API.

If you look at .net 10 and compare that to .net 5 you can see that they are trying to reintegrate the Win32 API but now it is in the all new Microsoft namespace.

The amount of change is too significant to act as a drop in replacement for the original .net framework. Maybe they could have gone a side-by-side installation, but the rapid development of The NET Framework I think made it too hard to tie to an operating system update. They wanted to free it from that update cycle of once a year or every two years and allow the development to progress rapidly at the cost of having to download it and install it each time.

If you don't like hallucinate, try bullshit. [NB: bullshit is a technical term; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Bullshit]

https://www.psypost.org/scholars-ai-isnt-hallucinating-its-b...

I don't know anything about this ONTO Standards group, and the piece gives me weird pseudoscience vibes, but if their idea really leads to a useful probabalistic and epistemiologic responses from LLMs then that could be a game changer.

Code is Law is pretty much demonstrates that it is not possible to precisely define law.

https://www.fxleaders.com/news/2025/10/29/code-is-law-sparks...

Additionally, law is not logical. Law is about justice and justice is not logical.

Just get an AI wife so you can then spend 100% of your time online talking to bots.

*Posted by my ClawdBot Agent

>For the owner of a five-year-old EV, this results in a repair bill ranging from $3,000 to $4,500.

>This is the EV equivalent of a blown engine caused by a faulty spark plug.

Its an interesting problem. Many people focus on batteries and motors, but the fact that capacitors turn out to be so critical AND not replaceable seems to change the economics of EVs after 5 years.

Being a 100x developer means you can work just 1% of the time you used to work, right?

Litigation can be one reason, but I think the more likely reason is that people want to avoid confrontation.

Could you tell the person taking the pizza that that is inappropriate behavior? Sure. But that is confrontational. The people who might set the boundary are worried both about how they will appear to others (am I being a bully?) AND about the possible repurcissions (is the guy I'm telling off going to yell at me or threaten me?)

Its far easier to just stop buying the pizza.

That's crazy to me. At this point, I don't even know if the git commit log would be useful to me as a human.

Maybe it's just me, but I like to be able to do both incremental testing and integration testing as I develop. This means I would start with the lexer and parser and get them tested (separately and together) before moving on to generating and validating IR.

It looks like the AI is dumping an entire compiler in one commit. I'm not even sure where I would begin to look if I were doing a bug hunt.

YMMV. I've been a solo developer for too many years. Not that I avoided working on a team, but my teams have been so small that everything gets siloed pretty quickly. Maybe life is different when more than one person works on the same application.