cush

There are. Did I say there wasn’t?

I’m just saying some children are highly encouraged to isolate themselves, and it’s ironic that the blog post thinks that AI replacing these isolating activities (coding, chat rooms, etc) will isolate people. It will likely give people the space to touch grass

While that may be true it’s completely unrelated to AI. AI could free up time to socialize

Honestly this level of antisocial introversion is probably the product of being highly intelligent and being fed through a school system that pushes kids to study alone for tests rather than problem solve in groups

It’s funny reading takes like this from software engineers that think the only way to meet people is at school, work, and in… IRC chatrooms...what? People do go outside and socialize in other places.

I’ve literally seen this

Have you ever tried dragging that monitor and all those cables and peripherals into a Starbucks and camping there for 7 hours? This is a freelancer’s dream machine.

I got you, you’re right. implementing legislation around software would require appointing a board of experts to create the codes - like building codes. The board licenses the professional software engineers. They also receive complaints and discipline them. From there, legislation follows. The codes and rules of conduct provide the framework required for legislation. Legislation can’t exist in earnest without software professionals and codes.

There’s absolutely no reason why professionals at this pay grade and handling this much risk can’t be following this level of rigor.

It’s hilarious that I started this thread by saying that software engineers should start to be held liable like real engineers and in the replies we have somehow decided to use… Nazis… as the analogy? What?

This doesn’t need an analogy.

Why not just look up examples of engineers disclosing breaches of code/contract? Every state has lists of complaints brought to their engineering board with results and disciplinary actions.

Dude look at my original comment. Your reply is a tangent on a tangent and has nothing to do with it. It’s off-topic. If you want to talk about the H1B thing then go do that in another thread. That’s not what my comment is about.

Don’t assume I’m lacking empathy. The goal of holding engineers liable is to protect the public against malicious software. Protecting the engineers is unrelated to my comment. You can have both. In fact, real engineers are mandatory whistleblowers, and protected.

It’s funny reading the responses to my comment here. Most people assume

1. That professional engineers being liable somehow makes the firm they work for not liable. Both are liable.

2. The professional engineer isn’t responsible for breaches of code/contract their colleagues are committing. They are. In most jurisdictions a PE must disclose in writing and are liable for violations they witness.

It’s surprising how uninformed folks are about how rigorous engineering in the real world is.

If you think this is overkill or unrealistic you’re jaded. The privacy and security of the general public is on the line. If engineers and firms were liable for every data breach they’d cease to happen.

What hoops exist today? There are literally zero hoops for software engineers. Zero.

Anyone can create a startup or call themselves software engineers and release insecure, privacy-violating products with no repercussions.

Yeah well lucky for all of us, the “rules” you speak of were defined by engineers, not the government. We call them codes. For example civil engineers follow codes defined by the ASCE

I’m an engineer and not only is “I’m just following orders” not a valid excuse but you’re legally obligated to disclose crimes

I never said engineers should be liable instead of the firms they work for. Both should be liable.

Your response feels like you were just looking for anything to shoehorn your overt racism into

An engineer is liable but so is the firm. A doctor is liable but so is the hospital. I’m going after both.

How would making imported workers liable do anything but disincentivize them from committing these crimes?

Their users are ad execs and data brokers

If only software engineers were liable like real engineers are

> it’s simply not humanly possible to keep up

Are you talking about manual review? Of course it isn’t possible to read that much, I never said it was. The scale of changes requires new approaches to engineering. Some may feel these processes are less rigorous, but in my opinion, when done well, they’re actually more.

I have worked in many codebases using coding agents. Sometimes their changes are large and sometimes they’re small. The better repos have many guardrails to keep the PRs small. I’m not sure why you’d assume why my or your experience working with them would be even remotely similar to working with them at Anthropic though. I think it’s just fine to say you don’t know. They have no obligation to appease to people debating in an HN thread.

I think in general you’re going to continue to struggle to translate your one-off experiences to these 1000x 10000x scales. Most people can’t fathom scaling anything beyond 10-100x.

And depending on the job, AI might replace the vital functions leaving us all holding doors

It’s kind of ironic how your comment starts with “LOC is a decent measurement” with zero explanation, then quickly devolves into rough estimates, assumptions, and finishing with “6M/day… it’s still insane”

You’re proving precisely what I’m saying. You don’t have any real information and your guess is as good as mine. It’s just as plausible to assume Anthropic runs 50x experiments for every feature they ship and only 2% of the code hits production. It’s just as plausible to assume half or more of their repo is tests. It’s just as plausible to assume there’s as much comments, skills, docs, and context engineering as there is code. It’s just as plausible to assume that there’s 10x more configs, localized strings, and content as there is executable code.

If you add all my assumptions together that leaves us with about 15x PRs worth of shipped executable code. And even with your generous 200 LoC per PR, it’s only 3000 Lines per day. Now that’s insane!

That’s fine. You can say “that’s a cool car but I’m worried it will end like the cybertruck” or “that’s a cool car and he’s a deadbeat dad”, but there are so many people in the comments saying things about how the car isn’t doing anything novel or interesting and that’s just ridiculous. It’s straight up sci-fi.

Honestly systems like this resemble real engineering more than manual human review does

30k PRs is such a meaningless figure though, you can't make anything of it. It entirely depends what's living in that repo. Adding localized strings, configs, things that change frequently, can easily move numbers like this by orders of magnitude. How big are the PRs? Maybe there's an auto-bug-fixer agent that runs around the codebase making thousands of single-line fixes per day. Who knows. The number means nothing in isolation. We used to scoff at bad managers for measuring the performance of engineers using lines of code, now we're using the same figures to judge AI. We've become the bad managers.

It helps everywhere... turns and straights - it provides downforce without wings. Wings cause drag, that push the car down but also slow it down. So the car can be going slow and still get incredible grip. On the corners the car won't slide, so it can corner at much higher speeds too. For both these reasons, this suction system was banned by most racing leagues in the 70's for being too powerful.

Does the thrust version not have suction too?

I'm no Musk fan. Like totally repulsed by the dude. But the comments here that there's nothing interesting about the demos are some serious cope. It's this kind of reality-bending bias that makes people disregard everything you have to say. When someone you hate creates something incredible, it's probably best to say nothing because any attempt to convince people otherwise will just backfire.

There is no world in which that car comes off the lot for $1M. That’s a $5M car, minimum

Even assuming it’s real and they genuinely are working on selling these to consumers (they aren’t), why on earth would you think this is built for the average person? At the absolute cheapest this car would be $5M off the lot. It’s for the ultra rich (assuming they ship, which they won’t) who want to drive it one day a year on the track

Building concept cars is a very important part of being a car manufacturer. The issue with Tesla is they take reservations as if it will ever go into production

Every car manufacturer creates concepts that they never plan on shipping. The goal is to attract engineering talent and do deep research. I’m curious at what price they’d need to sell it to break even…? Probably upwards of $50-100M