171–174 of 174 posts
I think it's very productive in areas that aren't economically impactful. Reverse engineering old windows games for example. Doing absurd ports between languages.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> AI costs aren't going to stay this high Why do you feel this way? Are you talking about frontier models from US companies or smaller weight open source models? From the perspective of US companies, it seems pretty clear they're severely under water and will need some way to become profitable or risk collapse, so how else will they do that or they than jacking up prices or some unknown future miracle advancement? I…
so how else will they do that By selling more tokens, which by all reasonable accounts are profitable on the margin.
Even if true, they also have to account for training costs or else they'll never break even.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> even if they were free. They are free. You can download glm-5.2 and run it on your own hardware. Even you got hardware for free, electricity would cost you more than the sub, in most places.
The gpus not the models silly
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> although participating developers felt they completed tasks faster using AI, they where around 19% slower > Maybe that was true in 2025, but it's clearly not true any more - I feel so productive now! Even if you are right, this is a completely baseless argument. The people in the study felt the exact same way! And "it's 6 months old, so I won't listen to it" is an insanely high standard. You're eliminating all the…
what evidence? more than half of social science studies fail to replicate, why would I believe that this one is in the good half?