161–170 of 284 posts
In my useless opinion, most people are not aware of how big AI is and how bigger it will be in 3~5 years. It's not worthy to be worried about it, because it will be a global problem, but there are people who are completely blind about it
Nobody is aware, but neither are you. We may as well have plateaued already. You don't know that.
I can't wait for the asteroid to hit C-Suite and senior execs. These are the most meaningless jobs and easiest to automate, with the most cost savings.
I think this is more generally,
> So where does this leave education?
We need to figure this out anyway, because gpt galaxia and gpt cosmos will mean no skill is worth learning functionally.
The law of 42: Any debate regarding artificial intelligence and human skill will inevitably collapse into a discussion on the meaning of life, the universe, and everything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My mother has a psychology practice and wanted to update her 20 year old website. I did the first few prompts (single static page, basically a brochure, don’t worry about hosting) into ChatGPT to get her started and a few days later she sent me a .zip which I uploaded. Only took a while because she wasn’t paying for ChatGPT so had to wait for the free limit to reset quite a few times. But overall it was super empower…
Not that I'm in favor of spending money unnecessarily, but I find it kind of surprising she didn't just spend the $20, given this was a website for her professional money-making business.
Person not understanding this should not work in marketing, or even claim they understand human psychology.
> So where does this leave frontend dev education? I think this is more generally, > So where does this leave education? We need to figure this out anyway, because gpt galaxia and gpt cosmos will mean no skill is worth learning functionally. The law of 42: Any debate regarding artificial intelligence and human skill will inevitably collapse into a discussion on the meaning of life, the universe, and everything.
I was originally a Flash developer, when that died when Steve Jobs banned it from iPhones, I pivoted to frontend. I got to see web evolve over the next decade or so and loved every part of it. Now, still as a frontend engineer albeit much more senior. The writing is on the wall, again. It's time to reskill for AI. It's not bad news. We as experienced engineers are needed to help build in the guardrails, frameworks, t…
I think that is the nature of being a software engineer, even before AI you had to keep learning new libraries/SDKs/APIs/languages to keep up with the industry trend. I think it will remain the same in the age of AI, good engineers will adapt.
So yea, I really welcome the change.
[1]
What I mean with being a generalist:
Did iOS dev as a student, web dev bootcamp instructor, teaching assistant (programming), teaching fellow (programming), found some SQL injections + docker vulnerabilities + replicated rowhammer with WebGL, did a lot of full-stack engineering (5 years), did a UX bootcamp, studied 2 bachelors + 1 masters + research master which is 2 years (psych, business, CS and game-design). Each full-stack engineering job was in a different language (C#, Java, JavaScript, TypeScript, Pharo/Smalltalk, currently JS & Python).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
She had no shortage of patients from word of mouth, but old website was minor liability in its datedness potentially putting off prospective patients. People already knew about her and website is essentially just “this is what I do, where I am and how you can contact me”.
> but old website was minor liability in its datedness potentially putting off prospective patients. Anecdata: I’d be more likely to use the services of a company with a good, old-style site than a bad, new style site. Things like pop-overs, text that animates in as you scroll, banner images that take up most of the “abive the fold” are all red flags for me. Oh, and the most common one: “Read more”. A modern site tha…
Another goal with the website I didn't note before is that its "quality" or "style" should generally not be consciously noticed, it shouldn't stand out for any bad reasons, people see it, get a good impression, do what they were looking to do with ease, success.
I got this philosophy from my interior designer (not to be confused with decorator) brother who told me how when he's done a good job, no one notices, but when he's done a bad job then people either almost instantly notice or simply feel uncomfortable without necessarily being able to exactly identify why, e.g. first impression of your hotel room should instantly be "feels nice" (and same with a public space in a building) and then you remain feeling comfortable throughout because the space is actually big enough for its purpose and laid out practically.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, presumably that's why she did not update the website for 20 years! If once she's decided to update the website—surely it's worth more then $20 at that point? Otherwise, she probably shouldn't be spending any time on it herself either, given the opportunity cost. Obviously she decided otherwise, I just find it kind of surprising. Like, in general, I'm always kind of surprised at what people are and aren't willing…
>If once she's decided to update the website—surely it's worth more then $20 at that point? the problem here really, from both sides of the argument, is the assumption that humans are rational economic actors. One side assumes that it is not worth 20 dollars to update the site quickly thus she does not do it, but really for that to be true (given costs of psychologists sessions etc.) then it would not even be worth u…
> The idea was nice, but it involved humans.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
so. if website does not lead to customers - why do any of that? actually why have website? Once you say yes to website you imply having one is somehow valuable, so in that case why not spend 20 dollars.
Just because websites can exist. Sometimes things are done for fun, or just for the sake of it. This perspective declares all the personal websites of people worthless, however, they are priceless. Because people's curiosity and creativity is priceless as well. Similarly, why create art and share it around if it doesn't bring in customers? Why make music, take photos, dance? Do we live to serve customers, or do custo…
The once off nature, scope and priority were so minor that it wasn't worth the hassle of actually paying, but if free wasn't an option we would have either used my Claude sub or she would have just paid, no big deal.
> For better or worse, React is heavily overrepresented in the training weights, and “agent experience” is starting to matter more than developer experience. Another winner takes all situation. This and the other post on agent tool use[1] makes me think we are in a period of great homogenization. I'm sure there's a group that's delighted about this but for me, it just makes me feel a little uneasy. [1] https://armatu…
Wasn't that true for tech in general though? I mean I have heard developers bitching about React for years now and every year I saw it get more adopted at the same time. Of course some obviously do not like it but the decision was usually driven by business and not coders. I feel its a simillar thing happening with AI code taste being primarily developed by big tech firms which ofc love homogenization. But its not al…
To be fair it is stupid that NaN !== NaN but that is how IEEE and CPUs made floats to be