When it comes to coding, non-programmers do not have to be in a defensive position worried that their job is under risk, instead they just see a great tool that saves them time, especially doing boring coding like dashboards, visualizations, interactive web-pages, or doing experiments that they otherwise would not have time for.
The thing is that PG had introduced pluggable storage engines exactly for the reason I am talking about, and there have been few implementations of columnar storage using PG functionality, it's just they always stayed out of the tree.
So I wasn't talking about some functionality that is completely out of scope.
But I agree in the end I may be forced to move elsewhere...
PostgreSQL was a right tool for my task for many years. It is a question for PostgreSQL can adapt to a new reality of much bigger datasets or I have to switch to a new tool. And I am not the only user of Postgresql in this context. So it is easy to say in vacuum 'you are using the wrong database', but it's not something that can be easily changed with 100s of Tb of data, existing user workflows etc.
Speaking as long-term (>15 years) user of Postgres in science, I am getting worried about the lack of columnar type of storage in Postgresql. As the datasets become bigger and bigger, the limitations of PG's storage are becoming more and more significant. I know there are various extensions (i.e. cetus) that may offer such functionality, but then you depend on that extension being supported in the future, as well additional complexity.
Seeing the words "recursive self-improvement" I was expecting something else from the article. E.g. how the transformer architecture or agent design is being changed/improved through LLM automation, but the article mostly talks about the LOC counts.
When the consciousness itself not understood and well defined in the first place, it is pretty pointless to debate if something is or isn't conscious.
And here in particular the reasoning behind the argument is bizarre. Decomposing the complex activity into simple steps like 'predicting the next word' and claiming that surely can't have consciousness. A similar argument would be -- there is no way that movements of electrons by tiny distance would produce consciousness.
I guess you are happy with this: "Staffers there who may be political appointees and not necessarily subject matter experts sometimes ask for substantive changes in the research."
In my understanding some index funds i.e. FTSE Russel ones will include spacex with the weight based on the floated stocks, so in practice the weight in the index will be small enough in All Cap etc indices. So I decided for myself it is not a cause for concern. But I think now it is the time to look for index providers who do not decide to bend the rules for short term gain (i.e. S&P and Nasdaq).
I simply don't understand why leveraged buy-out(LBO) is allowed in the first place. It is like paying for the company with the money from the company you are buying.
The whole system of US of needing to leave the country to even renew visas is absolutely bizarre and does not have analogues in most other countries (at least EU/UK)
The country elects an autocrat who fires experts and puts stooges in positions of power. Surprise-surprise that leads to idiotic policies, some of them mimicking the best hits of Soviet Union.
I believe that AI is truly revolutionary, but I struggle to feel sympathy to these large companies who (while building tremendously powerful tools) also work on extracting as much money they can from users, potentially making millions of them redundant while paying as little as possible for used texts, codes. In some sense this is how capitalism is supposed to work. But I am not required to like the bosses who pontificate about the future opportunities.
(A somewhat contrasting behaviour is say l deepseek who releases their models to the public, and I would not boo them)
The problem is not the brick price, but extra regulations, controls that they are followed etc, plus the fact that now instead of say 10000 identical bricks for one house you need 9999 ones + one different.
I simply think the priority should be more house building as people struggle to find places to live, and this measure will not help (the effect will probably be small I don't know)
I think it is an interesting question what kind of programming language one needs for an era of agents. It is clear that the programming language that was designed for humans is not necessarily the best for AI-driven software development. I guess the qualities one would want is some formal correctness guarantees, high performance. A question is whether this language is Rust or it is possible to design a better new language.
https://github.com/segasai