381–390 of 738 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The arguments against AI assisted coding used to be "only for toy projects", then at some point it became "no dignity", "joyless". Now it's "no new breakthrough" apparently. All in the span of maybe a year. I say it's made tremendous progress.
Then where is the big new non toy project created since vibe coding became a thing, that couldn’t have been created without ai?
Do code harnesses that build themselves count as recursive self improvement, or does it need to be the AI itself to qualify for the term? I always was fascinated (obsessed?) by robots that build robots, or even things like this that can contribute a lot to making the next version of itself: https://buildyourcnc.com/products/cnc-machine-blacktoe-v4-2x... (cnc router that cuts plywood, and is made out of cnc-router cut…
You need the AI eventually building another AI for the name to apply. This page is just bullshit. They vibe-code their harnesses, and yes, it shows. Anyway, what does recursive self-improvement even means for neural-network based AIs? It's not clear it's possible at all.
It seems odd to complain about a AI coding tool being coded with AI. That's just eating your own dog food. In my opinion it makes it better, because the tool is very well tested.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah. To play devils advocate, computers didn’t translate to massive productivity gains until long after businesses adopted them. There was that quote from ’87: "you can see the computer age everywhere but in the productivity statistics" Maybe we’re seeing something like that right now with AI? Who knows man
This is absolutely the right vision imo. Personally, I'm seeing massive improvements to my workflow and the quality of the product I'm shipping. I'm using AI to crank out far more tests than I used to be able to write, and I am using AI to analyze results with far more fidelity and speed than I could ever have done myself. That means I have more quality time. But this will change, because the meaning of software deve…
For now... the shareholders demand managers get the max out of every employee. Throw the force of competition etc into the mix and yeah labour isn't going to benefit all that much.
Anthropic is looking to IPO here soon. A key aspect of this is to prove profitability. Shifting their focus from Training new models to instead serving inference, they would greatly reduce their spend. In fact this is something being reported on that they are already doing, which is the reason for their first ever profitable quarter. Its awfully convenient that the company which has greatly reduced its spend on train…
I mean, if they've consumed all of human knowledge. What's left for them to train on? This pivot isn't only because it's cheaper and a way to juice the numbers for an IPO, it's survival because they can't improve more.
> today, Anthropic engineers on average ship 8x as much code per quarter as they did from 2021-2025. So based on my experience with the verbosity and non-DRYness of LLM code, a solid 2.5x in value delivered. Not bad!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right now the S&P 500 is going wild due to the promise of AI automating everything. Who is the "we" who is going to shut it down? Certainly not the US government. Nor the Chinese government w.r.t. their tech industry. Are you going to start the insurgency? Is there going to be an equivalent one in every developed part of the world?
Look at how many data center projects are getting shut down by grassroots movements, or how the approval rating for AI is like worse than congress and it's geeting booed at commencement speeches. I don't need to start an insurgency, people are already pissed off and the volume is growing. The stock boost is, as most will note, a bubble. It will enrich a lot of bad people and leave average people holding the bag, but…
Like, two? It looks more like the ladder being pulled after the incumbents got theirs than meaningful pushback. (And datacenters don’t have to be built in America.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think harnesses would count, AI != LLMs. Any piece of code that helps the computer reason for itself is AI, the harnesses are AI in a sense.
People are specifically talking about the engine itself and not the tools used. We wouldn't call humans creating a calculator "recursive self improvement".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You still need wizards to cast the spells..
Not if you’re claiming that the spells, once cast, automatically get exponentially spellier until they awaken into a spell god, capable of literally anything, including casting more complicated spells than any wizard is capable of. If that were true, you’d have no need for wizards. The fact that wizards are still around means it’s probably bullshit.
Imagine showing this article to yourself three years ago