531–540 of 612 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everything's ephemeral. C'est la vie.
Yeah but horses to cars is insignificant compared to an AI that is going to swallow us all. We don't even have time to make new career choices because AI will catch up faster than we can think.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"That is almost to say that the only part of the meal that matters is the cooking. But the cooking is only a tiny part. I take joy in describing the food I want and bringing that vision to life."
It's a bad analogy, because unless you're cooking a recipe, cooking is about all the small decisions you're making during the process which could apply both to coding or the design aspect of building software with an LLM.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Welcome to the world everyone else has to muddle through. The solution has long been, and remains, "Organize and demand enough money to live on from ~20 hours of employed labor a week, spend the rest of the time as you'd like."
Sure, I acknowledge that it was incredibly rare and lucky for "the thing I enjoy doing" and "the thing that pays" to have been the same for so long. That doesn't mean it's not painful for that to change out from under me - especially when I can't quite convince myself that the new way of doing things is actually better by any metric.
What's happening to you now may also feel unfair, but it's up to you if you're just going to be pissed on your own behalf, or if, now that you recognize that everyone else is going through what you've been newly-introduced to, you're going to go, "Hey, no one should have to live like this! Fix this crap for everyone."
Look, folks. I'm an old man and pretty much out of the workforce at this point in my life. But what I see in these comments day, after day is rather pitiful. As your Uncle John, I'm going to give you a lecture: From the article: >I can’t really blame anyone who’s just gone along with things Whst is this supposed to mean "blame"? Do you "blame" people for driving cars instead of riding horses? Do you "blame" software…
I see it like cloud computing. We were told infrastructure engineers wouldn't be necessary and anyone could build at scale now and blah blah. Instead we got Terraform and solid practices for infrastructure as code and moved beyond having to email some dude to get a new VPS or dedicated server spun up and making trips to the colo. It just changed the possibilities of what we could build.
I've been treating AI the same way and just leveled up what I build now and my ambition. It has helped a great deal with being okay with AI. All those fun insane projects in my head that I never figured would happen because "it would take a full team months to code that" are realistically possible. Big things that used to be entire companies are now possible. You hate Google search now? Guess what, you can make your own!
I don't treat my side projects purely as an "end goal" anymore but as a learning experience now. I slow down and actually read the code. These are my own projects. Then I take these things I learn to work and apply them. That's how it's always been when new tech comes along. I also hated kubernetes when it first came, but have now settled into "it has it's place". I learned about myself a bit and that I should be a little more open to change if for no other reason than peace of mind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if all the changes are “good” not shoddy, awareness of changes will still require layers of cognitive filtering. One human PM clerk will not be able to oversee all of the products, one developer will not be able to oversee all changes in all codebases.
Well obviously the real solution is for the owner of the company to 1. Fire everyone else 2. prompt the AI "make me more money than you cost" (that's a short prompt, innit?) 3. Retire to Aruba
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are offshore oil mining rig that needs workers. They pay big bucks too. You get some months off. The physical movement is better than cleaning the bathroom. No need to thank me. You're welcome.
Interesting idea. Only problems for me are: it sounds dangerous and physically straining for someone like me who hasn't done manual labor in many years and has no experience relevant to oil rigs. And also, there are almost no women. I guess oil rig workers probably pack in their women time hardcore when they're on their months off.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t see the analogy? AI is not preventing the craftsman programmer from coding. Your compiler hasn’t stopped “yielding fruit”, so to speak. The correct analogy would be, your mom can also just go to the supermarket and get much cheaper mass-produced tomatoes; which is… exactly the current situation?
I agree. If grandma grows her own tomatoes she can only try four tomato-related recipes. If she goes to the grocery store she can try thirty. The AI is enabling a lot more experimentation with software. The AI supplies the tomatoes (infrastructure / grunt work), grandma tries her recipes (the software / business idea).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's interesting to hear that lawyers are coming to you with those questions, because my read was that there was almost universal contempt for AI within law (save for the few "dumb" enough to use it and get caught).
The language of the law attempts to be consistent, legal English isnt entirely the same as ours, it remains somewhat inured to modernization. It is, if nothing a domain specific way of writing. (There is a great bit by Lenny Bruce on this very topic) If a basic filing with some citations is needed, letting one AI generate it, and then another validate it (to catch soft ball hallucinations) leaves it to be read and re…
The lawyers with contempt for AI aren't necessarily the best "critical readers and reviewers of documents"; a good number just appreciate the substantial moat the current system keeps for them, and are contemptuous of 1) attempts to cross that moat without paying a toll, however likely that attempt is to fail, and 2) the way such failures highlight that our legal system doesn't work the way most people seem to think it does, because that increases the chances that the public will become dissatisfied and push for change.
I guess if it doesn't cross that moat, there cool with it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t see the analogy? AI is not preventing the craftsman programmer from coding. Your compiler hasn’t stopped “yielding fruit”, so to speak. The correct analogy would be, your mom can also just go to the supermarket and get much cheaper mass-produced tomatoes; which is… exactly the current situation?
I agree. If grandma grows her own tomatoes she can only try four tomato-related recipes. If she goes to the grocery store she can try thirty. The AI is enabling a lot more experimentation with software. The AI supplies the tomatoes (infrastructure / grunt work), grandma tries her recipes (the software / business idea).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone addresses this differently, but for me, I always grated at people whose knowledge of esoteric patterns and language features was their whole identity. It feels to me like suffering through programming built that knowledge, and so that knowledge was an indicator of taste and experience and persistence, but then it became cosplayed as people sought the knowledge itself in "patterns", or "features" rather than…
> people whose knowledge of esoteric patterns and language features was their whole identity I came across too many of those people in my career and I can't say I'm sad that LLM are taking this away from them. The worst were the ones acting as gatekeepers during hiring process. You could have built S3 and they'd still look down on you because you didn't knew about some weird feature in Java.