rixed

You certainly mean "a lot more", not "a lot better", unless you believe in another form of knowledge than scientific knowledge?

> Do you think consciousness is "woo", or, scientifically unknowable? If yes, then great. We've admitted it's unknowable.

Unknowable does not imply "woo". The actual extent of the universe, beyond the observable one, is scientifically unknowable; But it's not "woo", is it?

Where is this strange rule coming from? Why not: "if it doesn't have conciousness when no current is flowing, then it doesn't have conciousness at all" for instance?

Let me translate those questions for you:

"Do you believe that AI is ${X}?" -> "Do you believe that AI is whatever you believe my definition of ${X} to be, and do you trust your belief that you understand my definition of ${X} enough that it's meaningful to have a discussion about it, even if we actually disagree on AI having ${X}? Or are we merely arguing about definitions?"

It sounds strange to invoke LinkedIn as a rebuttal to a post critical of modern UX. We are probably not in the same A/B pool.

Web UX.

This is not even a joke. For years I've been dodging the "what are you doing for a living" kind of question. Not that I feel particularly guilty myself, mind you, but I'm afraid a day will come when a random IT guy could be lynched out of frustration for all the hopelessly broken things pushed at us.

Web dev is special. The industry has spent the last 20 years sacrificing almost everything to make building web sites more beginner friendly. There is an expectation that the "full-stack" (everything between node and react) should be effortless, that is absent from other fields. "one click to deploy" in not a thing in crypto, in embedded or in kernel dev, for instance; whereas it's expected that a junior web dev is productive from day one. That's just normal industrialization, specializing jobs and then making them simpler, starting where the numbers are larger.

Ironically, piling up simplistic technologies have created quite complex houses of cards in places. HTTP itself being the most obvious example of a tech meant to be simple and quick to grasp that morphed into a super complex, ineficient and insecure gremlin of which nobody who is not a specialist (or an AI) has a full picture anymore.

Wouldn't you also want to be able to manufacture some sort of GPU?

I don't believe actual users will login. The LLM through their harness will, using an identity and password found in some shared vault. The app will still do authentication but no user management. Behind an access token there might be zero, one or several humans. Dystopian version: The allow-list for the oauth redir will become the new gatekeeper in a world without local compte, and the redir client the billed entity.

Exactly my experience. Yet, I believe app will not only provide data but also some custom, short lived UI widgets in places where a more specific and consistent UX makes sense. But apps will definitively lose control over the navigation and even lose track of the user (they will identify and authorize only one : the harness; who sits behind will remain a mystery)

I've written about this "UI to AI" pivot for my own Saas (cloudywithachanceoflatency.net). I believe it's a big win/win for every party.

Why is it so easy to be a pessimist though? I believe in the 50s and 60s it was easy to be an optimist. Why is that?

That's the point, in the beginning there were not supposed to be native apps, just web apps, some of them advertised in Apple site but not otherwise privileged.

Sure, the need to self defense against US dangerous neighbors. Looking at you, Canada!

Actually, from 2007 (first iPhone) to 2008 (the App Store), they kind of did.

Instead of a separate federated network for a single app, why not implement the app on top of a pre-existing federated network, so that nobody has to create yet another account? Like, on top of atproto or activitypods or...?

So, like pic?

tanks getting closer.

Planned obsolescence.

Exactly my opinion too.

Apps will become barely visible data providers. Some will provide specialized widgets for those cases where a specialized UI is needed. And data will be designed to inter operate.

I have reached this conclusion from a specific example I'm working on, more details in this blog post if you pardon a link to a website of mine: https://cloudywithachanceoflatency.net/blog_02-how-llm-accel...

Indeed, I'd read the post too quick, have been annoyed lately by the many front-page poges that seemed either trivial or not related to tech, and assumed it was the same. Now I did read it properly, and I reckon the feeling is well rendered and it does not feel that much out of place.

Well, hope the author will post a follow up in a month or two titled "how I eventually found joy again coding with an AI assistant".

How did you manage to keep being aware of it all day? In my experience that's nearly impossible.

Why is that on HN at all?

<meta> A large share about this HN forum is about Snowden the man. Was he right? Is he a spy? Is he more free in Russia than he would have been in jail? etc.

Contrast that with the article, a long and well documented piece about journalism and the files themselves, with not a single line about Snowden the man.

That reminds me about how hard it was, 10 years ago, to speak about the actual events depicted in the Wikileaked files, in all the deluge about Chelsea Manning and/or Assange.

Part of it is certainly due to our human nature: we love to discuss people, facts or ideas not so much. But one has to wonder: what if it were just a diversion technique?

We will never know; But what we do know is that one should never feed the trolls.

It's certainly a good idea to train a neural network to find good query plans but... an LLM??

I believe the important part was "on the server".

I stand corrected, and I'm glad i was wrong.

"Freedom" is a valuable concept but a poor model for understanding behavior. I'd support that if there were no business incentive to spend money and research to influence people into taking the wrong decisions.

Since the dawn of industry, people have been amazed by the new possibilities and how that would affect society once it's evenly distributed. Technical progress has been going on, percolating in every places and down to every person. Yet it's never been "evenly distributed".

What would happen when every one would have access to Internet? How different will the world be when everyone carries a computer in their pocket? Can communicate with anyone regardless of location and language, with no intermediary? Those were questions we used to ask ourselves not so long ago. Turned out: not much have changed.

For the future to be evenly distributed, much bigger changes will have to happen than large scale manufacture of efficient GPUs. Otherwise, tech will just be used to make sure progress and knowledge stays unevently distributed. That's the whole game of herding humans, after all; It's called "organized scarcity".

Yes sorry, fixed. Thanks!