ngomezdev

Wow. On paper this looks like the best Gemini release OAT. They really dialed in the usage and cost issues.

On the AA benchmark it kinda makes Sonnet and Terra look weak. Hopefully that translates to real world usage. Can’t wait to try it out.

Agreed on the naming issue and while it was novel at first it will inevitably get worse as more models get release, until decide to abandon it all together. It’s like they are setting themselves up for failure on that front lol

Not the primary point of what I was trying to say.

These tech CEOs hold a lot of influence and power. Thus they hold a lot of responsibility and must be held accountable. Point blank.

I don’t entirely follow this comparison. Maybe we spend time in different circles, but Musk in the current day is nearly universally s*t on by everybody I know. Even the people I know that still praise his work remain with a bad taste in their mouth.

My buddies and I were just talking about how Jensen is probably one of the MOST liked amongst all the leading big tech CEO/Owners. I feel like the amount of grace this thread is giving him is proof of that.

I don’t understand how that’s comparable to the perception of Musk.

Are you sure you are not over reacting?

I think you’re confused on the essence of what he was trying to say.

The comparison was drawn because when you are such a position of power, your actions have such a monumental sway. Thousands, millions of people’s of lives are impacted, for better or for worse. In Jensen’s case, that’s up to the court of public opinion.

However the thinking is that when you are in that position, a just and fair society would probably want to keep just and fair and morally tact people in those positions.

IMHO I don’t care what way you want to spin it, when you have that level of influence over one of the major drivers of the AI boom, you have INCREDIBLE power compared to what most people think of when you say “private citizen”.

What is it that you’re actually trying to say here.

I think at this point, what is more interesting to me is not the events themselves, but observing the dichotomy of moral stances in this thread.

Gives some light to understanding why the world is the way it is. No further comment :P

Despite basically reinventing the rulebook for modern office products Google still seems the least interested to do anything innovative or progressive with it.

Yupppp. My current conspiracy theory, with all of the increasing hardware costs and how easy decompilation projects are, is that there is going to be a major push to eradicate consumer hardware and keep all software in the cloud.

Everybody will have a mini PC for the sole purpose of streaming content, with no storage to keep anything on it.

There’s a severe lack of focus and the only endgame that still makes sense to me for Tesla is basically turning into a cab service like Waymo. Perhaps you own the car perhaps not.

The one thing that will hold out forever or will at least be the last thing to fall is critical thinking. So I think you simply interview for that.

At my small company we interview all candidates, regardless of experience level, using the same set of questions during the primary round. They’re a combination of open ended scenario type questions and pure debate style questions. We try to design them such that when you’re answering them, it’s similar to when you’re on the job collaborating on a technical solution, or triaging an incident.

We provide limited information at first to force the candidate to immediately ask for more info, to see what kind of questions they ask and what kind of information they care about. When they start to provide the solution, we like to throw in alterations or wrenches to see how they pivot. It’s very much “turn based”.

If you’re taking it seriously, it’s very obvious when candidates are either solving it for the first time, are recalling true experience, or are simply reciting information like they studied it. That’s why many of our questions work for many levels of engineering.

Additionally, because there is so much back and forth, you get to also “vibe-check” the candidate engineering wise. In our experience most candidates have enjoyed the process, so we feel like we uncover a lot about personalities here as well.

Unfortunately, the heel to this approach is that you pretty much have to conduct these in person. Because an LLM hypothetically would do well in this style of interview. We’re hybrid one day a week so it works for us, but it doesn’t exactly scale.

As I read on I thought this might be satire, but, I suppose every two weeks this philosophy becomes less hopelessly optimistic and more feasible.

Perhaps your workflows and processes are so efficient that this actually makes sense. But I’m still not convinced AI assisted development is at that point yet; I think the classic Build vs. Buy arguments still hold.

How much is this going to cost to maintain? How many dev hours? How many tokens? Is your in house solution going to provide the business and customer enough perceivable value that it’s worth the opportunity cost? Are you going to apply the same rigor and security testing that the popular frameworks are getting from the largest research firms in the world? How do you know the LLMs aren’t going to apply similar patterns and make the same mistakes? Why can’t you just use that AI expertise to accelerate patching so your exposure time is limited? How do you know you’re going to outpace the major frameworks and tooling providers in 2 or 4 or 6 years when they catch up with AI assisted development, if they haven’t already?

And very personally speaking, I’m still holding my breath to see if this AI bubble is a real thing or not. Because if it ever pops, well, that’s not going to go well for companies that are embracing this stance.