gtsop

Show us what you've built, general.

I am not sure what you mean by "this novel". It is a fundamental difference between all digital products (software, music, etc) and all other physical (non-digital rather) products. It doesn't have to be a novel difference to be important. This distinction in itself is enough to produce the effects we see on the economy. I mentioned the ever changing pricing strategy of such products as an example.

> I also don't think these things are wholy incompatible with our current societal structure.

Wholy incompatible? By no means, this industry is making tons of money. Surely it is compatible.

I think of it more like a handbreak. Yhe current capitalist societal structure is putting a hard limit to our potential as a society to fully leverege these technologies to better our lives. Open source is just a glimpse of what can be accomplished when money doesn't get in the way of our work exchange. And imagine what our humanity could have achieved if 1000x people did open source without having money issues.

> In some ways software is really fundamentally different from things like baking or plumbing

You were onto something with this but then got sidetracked.

The fundamental difference is that software (digital product) is cannot be given away and cannot be consumed, it can only be copied. Any other non-digital product, a bread loaf, a pipe, for someone else to use it, you have to give it away. You must not own the bread anymore so that the other person owns and uses it. Not the same with software since you never give away software, you give a free copy that costs nothing. Both you, the creator and the user now have a copy of the same thing and can use it indefinitely (this is the second difference, it is not consumed)

This is the fundamental difference that "disrupts" the classic capitalist economic flow. The proof of this disruption can be found in the continously changing pricing strategy of digital products and software, since companies are trying to adjust a fundamentally different product onto classical economic transactions.

The solution is a communist economy, where money won't be a transaction wall for product exchange and one's well being (as opposed to having to make money to live by)

Rogue nation = not under strict USA control.

If we wanted to treat words literally, the true rogue nation is USA. The only nation on earth to have actually dropped nukes on people. Have been prooved to spy on the entire world population. Plants coups around the globe. Invades any country they fancy in the name of democratization.

If that ain't a rogue nation I don't know what is

You are almost right. As I say since the beginning of this ai circus, this is the equivalent of flipping mcdonalds burgers (no insult intended for those workers). It is a thing, and people buy and eat them. But high quality burgers made by talented chefs will always be out there. That's my analogy, and i dont intend to be on the side of flipping mcdonalds burgers

> if there is a word for this phenomenon for how our system has gotten into such a rotten stat

There is, it's the system's name: Capitalism

Noone ever in the universe claimed that this system serves primarily the needs of humans. It serves profit. Now there is a ven diagram that has a union area between profits and needs, but the system does not care about making this union bigger, it cares about making the profits bigger. When that overlaps with needs... it is just a happy side effect.

No the OP is right, we had a whole department vanish: translators. Half laid off and half absorbed to other roles. I am waiting for this to backfire eventually, but even if it does, it will still be cheaper to handle the backfire than employing all those people.

I didn't see the guarding call a late-capitalism hellscape over the russian-ukrainian war nor the palestinian genocide, nor many other things.

So it looks like "we" cant tackle multiple bad things at once. Just some. And just the less importsnt ones

Exactly that's the point. I never saw the guardian blaming capitalism for genocide or war or food poisoning or major issues that cause misery to humanity.

So the criticism is empty and imo it only serves to catch the eye of the people who politically sympathise with the general opinion of "oh no capitalists have gone off the rails with some stuff, let's keep them in check"

And this is what my original comment is about. Let's keep them in check when they fiddle with our football tickets, but we don't have to name names when the worst on earth is happening.

> To some engineers this is a bitter lesson, they chose to be engineers precisely because they don’t want to manage. AI inside one IDE will only get you so far though, so you start a second IDE and a third.

No, we chose to be engineers because someone has to actually do work and deliver stuff while everyone plays with the new toy.

Here is the question that no hype-driving AI coding enthusiast has answered so far on HN, or anywhere: Show us what what did you build in 3 months that we would have built in 3 years?

I still haven't got anyone to answer this, maybe this will be a first.

Just using your keyboard to login and type these words mean that st least in some capacity you move according to the shape of the objective world :)

> What about animals?

It's not about excluding animals, the quote was in the context of talking about people. You can apply the very same thing to any entity

> This is also where the leisure time went. Keynes predicted 15 hour workweek, we decided to just have kids and the elderly not work at all.

Amazing analysis.

This problem has been solved already:

Intelligence is the ability of the human body to organize its own contours in a way that corresponds to the objective contours of the world.

Evald illyenkov.

And yes, the mind is part of the body, thus thinking consists of an action of organization to the contours of the world

I am in no rush. I like something being stable.

> As models increasingly shape how millions understand social and political issues, hidden biases could have a wider, undetected influence.

And where is the problem with that?

The problem is that the system wants to ensure the subordinates believe what they're told to believe. And this requires precise control. But there is a methodological problem when we move from one-way narrative control from TV and social media to a two-way interaction like an LLM chat.

When you ask an LLM a political question and it disagrees with you then you argue and at the end it tells you you're right. So it doesn't really matter what it's initial political output is.

So the actual "problem" is that LLMs fail to stay true to carefully crafted political propaganda like other media. Which I don't care at all.

A healthy thinking person should only use an LLM as a mapping tool, not a truth seeking machine. About every topic including politics.

What are the rights things to criticize in your opinion?

Also, asking out of ignorance, what things need to move forward? I thought wikipedia is a solved problem, the only work i would expect it to need is maintenance work, security patches etc.

> So the problem isn't robots, it's the structure of how we humans rely on jobs for income.

It's called capitalism

Completely agree with the motivation (dont like the parens)

Here is another use case i found helpful for html: i use a different, dimmer color for the closing html tags.

I now only use my own tree-sitter syntax and my own neovim highlight colors, i literally stripped all the defaults.

I started writting code with literally white text on a black background, and i only added new highlight groups when my brain really needed it. This way every color becomes deliberate and i gradually add in just what i need

> Or perhaps haven't really seen the reality that there's a LOT of code out there which is terrible and still does the job and still keeps people employed.

1. There is a big difference between terrible code that works in production, and terrible code that doesn't even work. And tge vast majority of the code I've generated by my LLM doesn't even work.

2. Software is inherently useful to enable change. If you don't want to change it, burn the program onto a chip and have it run faster. But we are here talking because you want to be able to change it. Terrible code makes change harder, riskier, slower, more expensive. The curves have already been discovered by others, I am not inventing any new knowledge here: there are software projects where longevity is of buisness criticality and there are others where the project will be thrown away in 1,2,3,5 years. If you'll throw it away, sure go ahead and vibe it. If you want it to stay, you're gonna have a bad time as changes become more and more expensive.

I got tired of the constantly moving space of IDEs and their plugins.

After 10 years of writting software, i know exactly what i want out of my IDE, so i took up a clean (completely clean) neovim and started building every single functionality by myself exactly as i like it. I call it, jokingly, unlazyvim.

I had been using vim for many years, but finally, after so many years my editor feels like a fine glove. Don't look up my code, don't ask what I built. Go build your own.

I can totally relate, very similar situation here.

I am currently kind of an anti-AI black sheep in engineering department because I refuse to fully embrace the exponentials and give in to the vibes.

I avoid burnout by simply switching off my brain from all this noise about vibe coding - i have thought hard and long, i know the way this is being implemented is wrong, i know they will create problems for themselves down the road (they already have, the signs are already there), i will be here to dig them out when the time comes.

So far I don't see anyone shipping faster or better with AI than I can manually, so I'm good.

Or you know, we could use wires..

"The rule of law" is the rule of the economic elites over the weak plebs. The "rule" is formed, shaped and ignored so they can have their way. Anything goes when you operate on the upper levels, we are not naive kids.

I'll let them (ai companies) figure it out while i keep coding manually.

I'll wait for the day they will release a js library to programmatically do all this llm context juggling, instead of using a UI, and then I will adopt it by doing what I do now, writting code.

I will write code that orchestrates llms for writting code.

Edit: This is obviously a joke... but is it really a joke?

Adding to that, I love how his analysis is completely detached from the consequences this burst will impose on the working man. As it did in the dotcom bubble.

This is capitalism, profit over human needs, what's the surprise here?

When ordered to do something that is clearly an illegal action, you can just say no. However, in most situations your actions won't be directly illegal, but aid someone else to illegal actions.

Simply, deny to carry out the work UNLESS you are directly and clearly instructed to by EMAIL. Oh, and be sure to make this request by email as well, as a record. So send an email saying "hey i was told to do that and i am concerned about the legality, please give me clear instructions over email"

This will calm them down.

Free market 101 - profits over needs

> Intelligence is rapidly improving with each model release.

Are we still calling it intelligence?