351–360 of 404 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just because LLMs habitually make negative comparisons doesn't mean we have to go around accusing anyone who uses them of having used an LLM.
I had to smile to myself when I noticed contrastive negation—with em dashes!—in a text written in the 90s. LLMs don't dictate what good writing is; people do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hardware will get better, local models will get better, it won't be very long until running a coding agent off a few solar panels on your roof is viable. And if this isn't true, then the future I envision probably isn't going to happen and you lot can stop worrying about your jobs.
The way I see it is either it will work (which I doubt, but whatever) and I'm out of a job, or it doesn't work and the economy comes crashing down harder than ever seen in history and I'm out of a job.
Cute, but clearly Godot is doing all of the heavy lifting here. "It's possible to make shitty but playable games by running random scripts through a >2MLoC game engine and iterating on errors" is interesting but not nearly as sensationalist.
[0] https://github.com/cleak/quasar-saz/blob/master/CLAUDE.md#us...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny idea, but this proves my point that these tools are actually just slot machines.. Except the house in this case takes the money you give them lights it on fire. Notice how people also have weird superstitious habits when using LLM tools, "You gotta write the prompt this way, say this first" Without having any way to prove it works. Its very similar to the behavior of gamblers. "push the buttons in this order fo…
I think this is more of a statement of human behavior under uncertainty and non-determinism rather than the tools themselves. Perhaps the ease of use brings it closer to the funny analogy you made but I think you will find this in any system where users interact with a partially opaque mechanism that produces different quality outcomes contingent on their input...
> more of a statement of human behavior under uncertainty and non-determinism rather than the tools themselves.
This is basically saying "It's not gambling, it's just the psychological underpinnings that form the foundation of all gambling enterprises". Who cares to split this difference other than casino owners?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody gives a damn about the dying of a trade. People don’t want their house foreclosed on when they lose their income, or their cancer to kill them when they lose their health insurance, to move an elderly parent into a cheap shitty old folks home because they can’t afford home health care, or not be able to pay for their kid to go on that school field trip. This would all be pretty fucking swell if the fundamental…
You act as if this is the first time in history technology has wiped out a trade and made people scramble to sort out their lives. No, this has been happening over and over again throughout history and at a rapidly accelerating pace since the industrial revolution. Why should we ask it to slow down on behalf of programmers, when it never did for anybody else? Don't pretend you didn't know this was a possibility when…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You might have to downsize your life but humanity as a whole will be better off This assumes that there will be other jobs to get. If AI replaces a large enough segment of office jobs then huge portions of the population will be unable to afford essentials like food and healthcare.
Walk into a staffing agency, ask for a job. They'll give you a list, pick the one that sounds the least disagreeable. Show up on time, every day, for at least two or three months and you'll convert the temp position into a full time job. It's literally that easy, showing up reliably is a super power that puts you in the 90th percentile of workers these days. The job probably won't be as comfortable as sitting on a co…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That also shows the delusion of some people that believe their vibe coded projects have any value. If generative AI improves at the rate that is promised then all your "promting skills" or whatever you believe you had will be obsolete. You might think you will be an "AI engineer" or whatever and that it is other people that will lose their job, that you are safe because you have the magic skills to use the new tech.…
Sounds great to me. Software devs might lose their jobs but billions of people will be empowered to spin up whatever software they need on demand. This is the future I dreamed of when I was a kid, and I'm not so cynical as to let the dying of a trade sour me to this objectively incredible technology.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You act as if this is the first time in history technology has wiped out a trade and made people scramble to sort out their lives. No, this has been happening over and over again throughout history and at a rapidly accelerating pace since the industrial revolution. Why should we ask it to slow down on behalf of programmers, when it never did for anybody else? Don't pretend you didn't know this was a possibility when…
> You might have to downsize your life but humanity as a whole will be better off This assumes that there will be other jobs to get. If AI replaces a large enough segment of office jobs then huge portions of the population will be unable to afford essentials like food and healthcare.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Billions of people will be empowered to spin up whatever software they need on demand. … so long as they have the money, and the power grid survives the overtaxation. After all, why bother encouraging a culture where people are genuinely empowered to tweak and create their tools? Why encourage a culture of exploration, of playful cleverness? What use is there to being a hacker, of sharing knowledge? It’s definitely…
Hardware will get better, local models will get better, it won't be very long until running a coding agent off a few solar panels on your roof is viable. And if this isn't true, then the future I envision probably isn't going to happen and you lot can stop worrying about your jobs.
Killing the drive to learn and explore is not empowering; it is fundamentally disempowering.