Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do the people in this corner use compilers? Would they agree that programmers who don't use them* have been replaced by those that do? *: I'm aware of cases like the recent ffmpg assembly usage that gave a big performance boost. When talking about industrial trend lines, I'm OK with admitting 0.001% exceptions. (Apologies if it comes across as snarky or pat, but I honestly think the comparison is reasonable.)
When Fortran came out, I don't think a lot of people yelled at the assembly programmers and told them "learn Fortran or be replaced".
Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”
351–360 of 363 posts
Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”
#352Earlier quoted context omitted.
The second sentence is revealing. The creation of the 787 didn’t make the 747 “trash”.
You also couldn't just unsubscribe from the 747 and get a 787 a the same price. Services are not the same thing as physical goods.
Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”
#353Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sure that is how many photographers felt about digital cameras and photo editing software when it first came. Now very few professional photographers work without digital cameras and photo editing software (even if it is just to tweak some colors). Yes, you will still have some artists making money with purely analog cameras without any touch up but they are a tiny minority of the photographers getting paid for t…
> I'm sure that is how many photographers felt about digital cameras and photo editing software when it first came. And for a few decades at least it was true. The technology was shite compared to film photography for a long time. The same will probably be true for AI, as full developer replacement will require AGI.
Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”
#354Earlier quoted context omitted.
In that case, the decision to launch was taken not by the astronauts risking their lives, but by NASA management, against the recommendation of Morton Thiokol's engineers. This was not simply an unfortunate "accident", but an entirely preventable gamble. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_Commission_Report#Flawe... > Loss itself drives innovation and resolve True, but did NASA in 1986 really need to learn this less…
Two different incidents. The parent was talking about Apollo 1, not Challenger.
Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”
#355Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”
#356Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is why they don’t sell it as “unlimited.” The gripe isn’t that there are limits, it’s that it’s sold as “unlimited” but there are limits.
Which to any reasonable person (and it's on the fine print) should mean reasonable limits But I guess some people do really need "Eggs: contain eggs" in their egg carton otherwise they will throw a legal fit
Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”
#357Earlier quoted context omitted.
My credit card web portal has a section for reversing transactions without having to call anyone. Maybe yours does too?
Reversing transactions is not cancelling the service I believe? As long as you don't cancel, you do owe them money. But if they make cancelling intentionally hard, one would likely have a good case in court to still not pay, if one would want to go to court over this.
Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”
#358Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not intended to be uncharitable - You clearly value many things I do (the world needs less attention-seeking, energy greedy shitty software). I don't know how else one gets information and forms an opinion on the technology except for media consumption or hands-on experience. Note that I count "social media" as media. My proposition is that without hands-on experience, your information is limited to media narrat…
> I don't know how else one gets information and forms an opinion on the technology except for media consumption or hands-on experience. Okay, I think I got your intent better, thanks for clarifying. You can add discussion with other people outside software media, or opinion pieces outside media (I would not include personal blogs in "media" for instance, but would not be bothered if someone did), including people wh…
The actions of a few companies does not invalidate the entire category. There are open models, trained on previously aggregated datasets (which, for what its worth, nobody had a problem with being collected a decade ago!), doing research to make training and usage more efficient.
The technology is here. I think your assessment on its relevance is not informed by actual usage, your frame of its origins is black/white (rather than understanding the actual landscape of different model approaches), and that your lack of interest in using it does nothing to change the absolutely massive shift that is happening in the nature of work. I'm a Product Manager, and the Senior Engineer I work with has been reviewing my PRs before they get merged - 60%+ were merged without much comment, and his bar is high. I did half of our last release, while also doing my day job. Safe to say, his opinion has changed based on that.
Were they massive changes? No. But these are absolutely impactful in the decision calculus that goes into what it takes to build and maintain software.
The premise of my argument is that what you see as "fatal flaws" are an illusion created by bias (which bleeds into the second-hand perspectives you cite just as readily as it does the media), rather than your direct and actual validation that those flaws exist.
My suggestion is to be an objective scientist -- use the best model released (regardless of origins) with minor research into 'best practices' to see what is possible, and then ask yourself if the 'origins' issue were addressed by a responsible open-source player in 6-12 months, whether it would change anything about your views on the likely impact of this technology and your willingness to adopt it.
I believe that it's coming, not because the hype machine tells me so (and it's WAY hyped) - But because I've used it, seen its flaws and strengths, and forecast how quickly it will change the work that I've been doing for over a decade even if it stopped getting better (and it hasn't stopped yet)
Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”
#359Earlier quoted context omitted.
You also couldn't just unsubscribe from the 747 and get a 787 a the same price. Services are not the same thing as physical goods.
True, but the statement sort of implies that the models are intrinsically "trash" today, and we're just waiting for that to be revealed by the next relatively superior model.
You are also paying for a service with no clear SLA or measurable performance indicators. You have no way to determine if what you got at launch is as powerful as what you're getting now. It's all about feels