matsemann

They didn't claim they've read ai pharma textbooks, just used a pharma textbook (which I guess is heavy to read) as a comparison to being easier to read than ai written text.

Just skip the powerpoint if you can't be bothered to create it. It's painfully obvious for anyone listening that the presenter didn't come up with or think through what they're talking about.

Agreed. We're still bottlenecked when it comes to feature work because we need to think of the ideas, user test, talk with stakeholders etc. But somehow inventing loads of tasks to feel busy anyways. Those tasks are the side quests, things we normally wouldn't take on. It feels great to finally squash that bug or do that rewrite. But you're adding stuff onto everyone else's plate as well. Discussions, reviews etc, a constant barrage of new things to consider.

Not if you turn off your brain. Never actually stop to question the path you're going down, because the speed is making you blind. Which is what I feel I see more and more. Or how do you even know it's the wrong answer if you didn't think it through before starting?

One example: setting the agent ablaze on some task, keeping it going, and after a few days of working with the agent you have a feature. But it's not what you were supposed to make. The agent didn't have all the context and made something slightly off, and you never internalized the problem enough to even spot it. If you actually stopped to think a bit on how the feature would have to work to tie it in with everything else, like you would have done before, you would've spotted it.

Second example: something wasn't feasible to do before, due to not being worth the time investment. Like a feature that would need a bigger architectural change to implement. You and the agent take a crack at it, and rewrite huge parts of the code, and it seems to work. But now no one understands how, and it might have been the wrong way to solve it, you just went with it. Before, you would've sat down and discussed and thought about the architectural tradeoffs. Now one decision was just made with little thought.

Only because anthropic&co will price themselves just below the cap where people contemplated switching. In so, the Chinese models still set a sort of cap on the prices they can charge, even if not directly.

I think that's an orthogonal issue. A webpage can be crazy with loads of JS stuff, but still print nicely or behave well defined when it comes to semantics, screen readers etc.

At around 10 years old, I remember spending more time on the word art for my titles than the rest of the paper for school projects, heh.

Also remember that I set up some kind of templating, where I could print the same document multiple times, but it would go down a list of values. So I could print personalized birthday invitations, I felt so cool 8)

It's increasingly clear Europe can't rely on the US as an ally.

I see people claiming that others are "closing it wrong". Something about you have to snap it using the edges, absolutely not push into the center?

Until uv, I used docker to run python projects locally. Got so fed up with venvs and versions and slowness and lack of wheels and spending so much time mucking around with it when cloning or updating a repo.

Uv hasn't fixed all issues, but made it far less painful.

Perhaps if you know how. Watching my dad use his iPhone.. Every time have to teach him something new, and hope he remembers it.

So stupid interface. No discoverability.

What a shitty way to dismiss anyone with any concerns whatsoever.

Can you explain a bit what it is one is buying? A prompt? I don't get why it can't be the component, isn't it better to use that than a prompt?

By random chance you probably wouldn't get that many zeros. Of course, one could say it's just as random as any other string, but..

I think your definition is off. Js was never for "code". The code itself is just a means to a goal. That certain things better can be achieved without js is good.

> This also helps the model maintain a more consistent playing style. Sometimes there’s a sacrifice available on the board, through many turns. A human would usually either decide he wants to do it or not, and stick with that decision until something concrete changes. But when I played this bot before adding recency, the bot would be ignoring the tactic for many moves then after an unrelated quiet move, go for it. It felt very alien and off-putting.

From the position history in the previous post. Good point. Same with bishops "sniping". If a bishop is moved to b2, and remains there or 20 moves, it can be "forgotten" and opponent suddenly has a pin or something underprotected. But if I saw the exact same board, but the previous move was moving the bishop to b2, I would be aware of it. That kind of local thinking is of course something I should learn to not do, but at my level (1700-1800 FIDE) it's how humans play.

Well, it's also impossible to link to the official one (here https://www.jwz.org/xscreensaver/ )

without seeing eggballs in a cup due to JWZ's ego. So I say there's no winners with two big egos like these.

It's 80 % after copying most of the already ongoing project. That's at least what's been going on in the game recomp space recently: AI bro asks an agent to do something, it packages up an existing project, they make a viral video, and get all the mind-share.

People will claim that it's fine, because in the end the problem was "solved". But the problem is that the vibe tool is often just 80 % there, and will be abandoned. But it took all the hype and drive and motivation to make another tool. So everyone is worse off.

Why not? Why can't efficiency be realized into less work? Why do you believe it so preposterous that someone else than the already wealthy should reap the rewards?

What about last 10 or 20 years?

ah, first sentence I thought yu was a typo. Second sentence I saw it I thought it might be a linux component of sorts. So it's not just a stylistic choice, it's actually harming my comprehension of what they're writing.

Shouldn't a more efficient society give us more time to do what we enjoy, not less? If not, what's really the value of these things? Economical value for shareholders?

In my head it's a bit like people ending up making a game engine when they set out to make a game. It's funnier to spend time on the techy stuff than the other stuff. So in this sense, you spend time making lots of automations and build the factory, but very little time actually building the product.

If anything you sound bitter and threatened, which is weird to do over someone liking a programming language. Dismissing everything as them having drank cool-aid is not befitting of this discussion or forum.

While I'm sure I'm also in a bubble, the numbers you present are far far off for instance Jetbrains' state of developer ecosystem reports. Where kotlin is roughly at 1/4th of javas usage, but for android quite high, and for backend up at 49 %

https://www.jetbrains.com/lp/devecosystem-2022/

Which matches what I've seen. Every single huge company or government function in Norway have the last years written most of the new code in their applications in kotlin. Basically all java conference talks I've seen has kotlin as the backdrop.

Kotlin's impact in preparing java devs for more functional code has been tremendous.

I guess it depends on what people define it as. But I've seen many devs build custom harnesses of sorts, and spend lots of time on that to wire it all together, to then really not achieve much with them. Examples being tools or stuff that got superseded once mcps became a thing. Or spend hours making gigantic folder of skills that specified loads of stuff that the next generation model just could infer. Or build a gigantic parallel agent suite when the bottleneck wasn't the agents in the first place.

I get your point, but Kotlin is still what made many of these specific features widely known to java developers, and accelerated the push from devs to get similar things into java.

Mind you, I like that java has taken its time to get the features right. Of course, java has had the advantage of enhancing the jvm while adding the features, where Kotlin had to work around the jvm in some cases (like green threads vs coroutines).

So I prefer javas version of many of the of the more modern things (but do miss Kotlin's lambdas and vast library of extension functions when writing java). But I feel it's wrong to downplay Kotlin's role in modernizing things on the jvm. Heck, if it weren't for kotlin as a temporary stopgap, I'd probably would've left the jvm while the features were still lacking in java.

Who are you to decide it's not allowed any criticism at all?

The idea is good and cute (the AI writing is a slog to read though). But I wince a bit at seeing a pit with something looking like a mouth guard at a glance, as if they're not scary enough already.