limflick

Finally a job safe from AI!

Hell, Google pays Junior Engineers less than that in Bangalore.

Could you give me an example differentiating detail oriented work vs analysis oriented work?

I was shopping for washing machines last summer and looking at huge "AI" stickers on the more expensive ones gave me a headache.

>obfuscate your privacy.

Edward Snowden says hello.

> they consistently fail to understand the very delicate choices that it made to ensure optimal performance.

Do you have an example?

I'd imagine it'd be a reasonable tradeoff for disabled people who can't use their hands.

As someone who's still learning English, this is one thing I'd never use AI for, at least not in the near future, simply because thinking and structuring my thoughts before typing is the same as it is before speaking and actually talking to other people can't be outsourced to AI.

But I imagine if I'd been a native speaker I wouldn't mind using AI like OC does since it's a convenience. Same way I use a calculator for two digit multiplications in real life but spent years learning to do it manually in school.

Phrasing, I wasn't blaming anyone, just curious about the technicalities.

Couldn't that also cause glitches since optimizations meant for HL2 might not work for, say San Andreas? I understand some optimizations might be universal but I can't help but think about unexpected behavior.

> to rename the game executable to hl2.exe

This seems genuinely unbelievable. Does anyone have a technical explanation for this?

I've had the opposite experience with all the math nerds that I know. End of the day it's all anecdotal ig https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Mathematician%27s_Apology

That's what all the Physicists tell me.

I always think about how relatively bug-free older games like GTA San Andreas are, since if they ship with some game breaking bug it's pretty much permanent. You could say this about software in general, but with games, especially non-linear ones I'd imagine there'd be more edge cases involved (I've never developed a full game myself, so I can only speculate).

In paper mario 64 (20001), there was a game breaking bug where I got enough star points (or whatever they're called) and got the prompt asking me to level up. But I was already levelled up to the max, and the game wouldn't let me proceed without levelling up. I couldn't roll back to the previous save game because every time I beat the boss I'd get enough points asking me to level up again and I'd be stuck. These days a simple patch would do the trick.

I can't imagine a game like Cyberpunk 2077 coming out in 2004 in the state that it did.

AGI in the next 20 years is more likely than all the roads in my country getting fixed anytime in the future.

I'm curious, do you have an example?

I think that's the best thing they could have done as a company. Sounds like the end-user first philosophy is still there.

"Citizens United" might be the most ironic name in the history of western democracy.

I don't think those two things are mutually exclusive. Good chance that a few students that cheated or at the least used AI in a major capacity to graduate, still booed when that former Google CEO brought up AI at the graduation speech. Being pro AI when it benefits them and anti AI when it doesn't is just human nature. I'm being a little reductive here though.

Auto-complete on steroids, is still my favorite analogy for AI. I don't mean that in a negative way either. Autocomplete is very good, but that never stopped me from learning English grammar and spelling.

I haven't read the study, but I wonder if one reason comprehension went down was because of over-reliance on AI among students.

How good is AI integration in Apple products? Did they drop the ball as hard as Microsoft did? I naively assumed a few years ago that Microsoft could pull it off perfectly because they had more than enough in terms of resources & engineers (yes, I was this naive in college)

I guess an optimistic way to look at this would be to treat this as just another layer of abstraction, meaning people could focus on larger scale problems moving forward, similar to how the evolution of programming languages influenced development time, quality and the quantity of software being put out. The question is at what price does all of this abstraction come at, assuming AI continues to evolve at its current rate.

I wonder how Steve Jobs would've reacted to this GenAI boom. He constantly talked about the intersection of Humanities and tech, as well as fostering creativity by pushing people to their limits (for the better or worse), so I don't think he'd be one of those CEOs that's first in line to get rid of human workers as much as possible. Or maybe he would be and I'm just giving him too much credit.

On an unrelated note, I haven't used an Iphone since 2018 and I wonder if Siri has gotten any better. I do see "Apple Intelligence" being advertised everywhere and besides AI summaries of texts on the notifications bar I haven't seen anything to understand what Apple Intelligence actually means.

I share your aversion to modern marketing tactics, but by your logic, programmers that develop the addictive social media algorithms are the meth cooks. Everyone is complicit. Modern day "tech bros" get a significantly worse rep than marketing folks these days. No use in participating in this blame game.

You don't have to be able to vibe code an entire business from scratch to know that the technology behind AI is significantly more impressive than VR, crypto, web3 etc. What the free version of ChatGPT can do right now, not just coding; would've been unimaginable to most people just 5 years ago.

Don't people and companies using AI lazily to put out low quality content blind you to its potential as well as the reality of what it can do right now. Look at Google's VO3, most people in the world right now won't be able to tell you that it's AI generated and not real.

AI development/research is far too modular and globalized to be regulated, or have regulation have any sizeable impact on its progress, assuming it's even possible to properly define clearly, "limits that shouldn't be crossed". Even needing to understand enough about AI to define those limits would ironically be made difficult through regulation. Just my 2 cents.

Aren't most interviews like this? Most dev openings I see posted mention the specific language who's expertise they're looking for and the number of years of experience needed working with said language as well.

It can be annoying, but manageable. I've never coded in Java for example, but knowing C#, C++ and Python I imagine it wouldn't be too hard to pick up.

> It's amusing to me how people keep trying to apply engineering principles to an inherently unstable and unpredictable system in order to get a feeling of control.

Are you Insinuating that dealing with unstable and unpredictable systems isn't somewhere engineering principles are frequently applied to solve complex problems?

I think the point is that it's more about trial and error, and less about blindly winging it. When you don't know how a system seems to work, you latch on to whatever seems to initially work and proceed from there to find patterns. It's not an entire approach to engineering, just a small part of the process.