koonsolo

You should check out this thing called GPL that is the standard license of open source projects like Linux, and heavily depends on copyright laws.

Or are you suggesting open source software is public domain?

Linux is clearly not public domain as it has a GPL license. And GPL heavily depends on copyright laws.

This reminds me of a joke my neighbor used to tell:

If catch a burglar in my house, I will ask them what they are doing. If they respond with "I'm searching for money!", I'll suggest "Let's search together, and whatever we find, we split 50/50"

They test everything manually and don't have any automated end-to-end tests? That basically proves my point ;).

> That might be the case, but Simon's case "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle" is very different.

When it was new, sure. Right now, models can be trained on that because everybody uses it as a benchmark.

Being able to work with an infinite amount of dumb interns that work super fast and have a vast amount of knowledge.

Have you seen the automated tests that QA members deliver? My experience is that they are horrible, and it's not so hard to beat that low quality bar with an LLM.

I have a theory: if they were good at writing automated tests, they would have been developers instead of QA engineers.

Not saying that there aren't any high quality QA engineers, I worked with some. But LLM's raised the bar in a way that most QA engineers can't reach.

I used to hire people to do photoshop for me. So yes, I kind of get the idea.

I don't hire them anymore. Can you guess why?

Same experience on my end. It's crazy what the latest version can pull off, with reference images, text, etc.

I can also switch back and forth between JavaScript and C++. Doesn't mean they are similar.

Conceptually, branches in git and mercurial are worlds apart.

In Mercurial, a branch is a branch. In git, a branch is not really a branch but a pointer.

So already the naming in git is very confusing, and conceptually it clearly is very different from Mercurial because of this reason.

Software developers get paid to crunch out as much code as possible. If you work twice as fast, do you think your employer will let you slack off a bit because they ran out of work?

What really happens is that your bucket gets filled with more work, and now you are as busy as before. Or did someone else got fired because now you were working twice as fast as them?

If your competitor can deliver more features faster and with higher quality, I don't think it's them that will end up bankrupt.

There are jobs with limited work, and jobs with unlimited work.

Since your farming land is limited, after the job is done, there is no more work.

For software projects, there is always more work to do. It's an arms race between competitors. Imagine you fire developers to maintain your speed, and your competitor keeps their people to go faster. Good luck to you!

I agree with you, but a big drawback is that the accuracy or confidence of their output can't be estimated.

So they surely know a lot, but you are never sure if the info is correct or not.

Do you think the latter can be achieved with the LLM neural network architecture? I highly doubt it. Neural networks are very old tech, and it took us that long to get us here.

I'm sure we'll reach AGI at some point, but looking at AI history, I don't see that coming any time soon.

In 2000 I learned about this old technology called "neural networks".

AI really depends on long winters and rare breakthroughs. Deep neural network was the most recent breakthrough.

The iterations you currently see it just adding more storage, but the fundamental neural network structure doesn't change.

I'm confident AGI will not be achieved by the LLM architecture, and when the next AI breakthrough is, is anyones guess. But if you take history into account, it will take a while.

So now your competitors go twice as fast as you. Good luck with that.

It's clear you don't understand the "deterrence" part of "nuclear deterrence".

Like I said, if you think you don't need nuclear deterrance, there is no point in discussing this further.

Also funny how you give 2 examples of nuclear powers who attack countries with no nuclear deterrence.

No, it was a deliberate strategy from the green party that were very anti-nuclear. They replaced it with gas power plants. And if you think this is a joke, no it isn't.

If you think that's lunacy, let me add some extra info on top of it: It was the green party that lead the closure, and then replaced it with gas power plants.

You don't think nuclear deterrence has a place in a modern defense strategy? If not, then I don't see the point in discussing this further.

So Germany will depend on France for their nuclear deterrence then.

> f you can write the rules down, an agent will satisfy them faster than your team will.

Big difference between a working model that needs to be optimized, vs nothing working at all.

I hope you're French, otherwise you are still relying on US defense.

At the current cost, I just use the best model all the time. Why wouldn't I?

> coders are not exactly demonstrating great discretionary decision making.

From a business perspective, why would I start thinking about which model to use, when I could cheaply always use the best model?

Are you suggesting AI can understand things deeply?

LLM's are fast at applying information, but thinking deeply, they do not.

I love LLM's, because now I can focus more on the creative and thinking deep aspect, and leave most of the typing and stack overflow browsing to the LLM.

> Of course leftists are responsible for the current state of Russia. I hear there was this thing called "Soviet Union", involved in getting this country to it's current state. I guess you must not now. Look it up?

Very strange that you claim the great state of affairs in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania is thanks to the the leftist Social Union. But hey, if you want to make that claim, that's all up to you.