43 karma · joined August 28, 2024
The universe is a stateful organism in constant flux.
Put another way: brushing-it-under-the-rug as a service.
Despite all of the talk surrounding AI in the workforce/business world, I think it is actually most important in science.
I realize this is somewhat off-topic, but the big companies kind of destroyed the internet with all the JavaScript frameworks and whatnot.
Maybe if he reverts the name.
But yeah, read a book. Practice poetry. Go analog. It’s very rewarding!
This is the thing about open source is MOST people do not contribute anything. And we’re seeing this trend with the whole Continue.dev situation too. Copy-paste, rebrand, make some money.
I think everyone needs to consider what the O.G. Wordpress team has created—and how many hours of blood, sweat, and tears went in. And then some folks just copy-paste and siphon out their business.
So, if AI follows suit, we will witness the dumb (but very knowledgeable) AI start to supplant workers with questionable results; and then someone (or a team) will make a discovery to take it to the limit and it’ll be game over for large swaths of jobs.
GitHub built their business on top of Git and collaborative coding. Microsoft (who owns GitHub) built part of their business on Visual Studio (also IDEs) long before AI was mainstream.
So it’s a natural extension to their existing business.
But if you’re selling me on a smarter autocomplete, I can already say from experience that AI can bounce good implementation ideas around, but it ALWAYS takes my intervention to get it right.
I’m happy to pay for an AI service, but I’m not going to pay for an AI service, an AI coding extension, an AI diff util, an AI SCM, and so-forth.
EMacs and Treesitter is much faster way to “find all references to X” in the codebase. Other questions can be answered with the naive grep implementation and marginal brain power.
If all they’re investing in here is to write boilerplate code, well, that takes not much time in the grand scheme of things. Where the value add is actually in the design phase. And, as a result of these tools people are going to just skip those crucial steps.
Am I missing something?
I mean seriously, people on here. I’m just spitballing ideas not intended to write some kind of dissertation on brain-machine interaction.
That’s Elon musks department.
They already model neural networks on the human brain, even though they currently use orders of magnitude more energy.
The starpacks/starkits for packaging apps together are really nice.
For anyone interested there’s a fork of the Tcl Dev Kit at: https://github.com/bandoti/tdk
This allows one to package applications with shared libraries and all bundled together.
The problem with chat-based solutions is people get lazy in articulation. So instead of a cohesive idea it’s spread across a giant thread. And instead of actually creating a proper document, it’s easy to say, “Meh, I’ll do it later it’s in slack.” But then it never gets done, and the info is privy to only those in the conversation.
It can be good or bad either way, but there’s no substitute for in-person communication; and there’s no substitute for a thoughtfully constructed document.
It’s a very useful tool to see how to do something a different way, and sometimes it’s surprising and has some really good ideas!
The problem is people expect these tools to “just do it”, but that doesn’t work. You need to iterate—if it makes a mistake, nudge it in the right direction and you’ll find it knows how to intelligently adjust where it goes wrong.
It would actually make the phone more comfortable in the hands too because they could improve the weight balance.