I think about this a lot. From the POV of a medieval peasant, we likely reached the singularity a long time ago.
2,089 karma · joined June 28, 2021
or, assuming vim is your $EDITOR, you can use vipe:
`command_a | vipe | command_b`
> I have been using ruby since 2005 or so. Static types were never relevant or needed in the slightest here.
We are like Liebniz monads, with disjoint views of the same universe due to our different experiences. I worked for several years at Shopify and there were droves of developers begging for types. Shopify itself recognized this need. We contributed early to Sorbet and began implementing it in the main monolith prior to it being publicly announced. I personally was the incident response on-call for a million-dollar bug that static typing would have prevented from ever being merged. And so on.
More generically, our species' Achilles heel is our inability to factor in the long-term cost of negative externalities when evaluating processes that yield short-term positive results.
What happens to all of these AI-native companies if the AI bubble is not able to survive in these conditions? If your current development process is built on the metabolic equivalent of 400kg of leaves per day[0], then when the allegorical asteroid hits, you're going to be outperformed by smaller, nimbler companies with much lower resource requirements. Those companies may be better suited for survival in hostile macro conditions.
In other words, I think a lot of companies believe that they're trimming their metabolic fat by replacing engineers with AI. Lower salary costs! But at the same time, they're also increasing their reliance on brittle energy infrastructure that may not survive this century. (Not to mention the brittleness of the semiconductor fabrication pipeline, RAM availability, etc)
Sounds like Macrodata Refinement.
Disassembly implies that you're still distributing binaries, which isn't the case for web-based services. Of course, these models can still likely find vulnerabilities in closed-source websites, but probably not to the same degree, especially if you're trying to minimize your dependency footprint.
All joking aside, I disagree with the author regarding the Grand Canyon. Havasupai Gardens -- the verdant oasis at the bottom of the canyon, where you can camp and recharge -- is one of my favorite places I've camped. There are areas for wading and swimming, and the sounds of the night creatures is eerily beautiful.
What makes you think your comment was worth reading?
Off-topic but just wanted to thank you for teaching me a new word. I try to always reply to HN comments that expand my vocabulary.
LLM's remind me of sprites, pixies, and the like, who are situationally helpful but require constant supervision. We're like modern magicians who learned how to summon these sorts of spirits and bind them -- imperfectly -- to our will. But their perception of truth and reality is "through the looking glass" relative to our own. They aren't lying, from their own frame of reference, even though what they say is untrue relative to ours.
> Overall our goal isn't to only collect data, it's to make the Vercel plugin amazing for building and shipping everything.
"But maybe... OLEICAT? no..."
> the state of the art today is not as good as the very best
and
> state of the art models completely surpass any individual’s productive output
are not contradictory. If the models completely surpass any individual's productive output, doesn't that mean they're better than the best humans? Or maybe I don't understand what you mean by "surpassing productive output." Are you talking about raw quantity over quality? I mean, yeah... but I could also do that with a bash script.
I don't think this is the flex you think it is... in my experience, the bottom 10% of programmers are actively harmful and should never be allowed near your codebase.