Since you keep being the top comment:
I agree with your philosophy, but that is not how Biology often works.
When enough green pastures are around animals usually reproduce till that is no longer the case and they need to move to other pastures. They continue doing this untill all green pastures are occupied. After this they start competing with one another to compete for the green pastures already occupied.
Some animals will be so succesfull that they take larger green pastures, letting others starve. If by some miraclelous event (ai?) suddenly a lot of green pastures arise, animals will simply reproduce again till they occupied all green pastures again.
Looking at us?
The agraric revolution, neither the Industrial revolution, nor this ai revolution have decreased how much we work on our 'jobs' (finding food indirectly).
All it did was increasing the population so that all green pastures became occupied.
I would say making the model larger and larger will soon reach the "the point of diminishing returns".
Even if the model might still get 'smarter' this might not be a good thing because the consumer (us) might not understand at all what the ai is doing. Or it's intelligence will just not be of practical value.
After this it will be hardware optimizations and tooling specializations (having different models for different tasks) and running the whole model might not be too expensive anymore.
Will they be outcompeted by cheaper Chinese competitors or open models? Possibly.
I hope we reach the point I can run the whole darn thing on a old laptop.
I know a PHD in math that claims math is invented by ourselves and not any universal true. So well, depends who you ask.
Also some of these programming utilities may outlive some math proof. Time will tell
Haha it foolded me: a bit ambigious to call it 'visible'.
The light is in the 'visual wavelength spectrum'.
Also by far not bright enough to be visible.
The meat is bad for you propaganda.
Cannot believe people buying that.
It is known for millennia that a varied diet including vegs fruits and yes meat and fish is healthier then skipping any of those.
But somehow now when overpopulation makes our hunger for meat less convenient it becomes suddenly unhealthy.
Of course I understand that the antibiotic and and heavy metal infested meat and fish we eat is way less healthy then the meat our ancestors would eat.
Because desktop apps are harder to make money with.
They are easy to crack / pirate.
Also making a monthly subscription is harder for a desktop app (you would need still also a webapp to check for the monthly subscription).
It is on the other hand very hard to pirate software that only runs on some server. Also quite easy to force a monthly subscription if you simply hide app behind a login screen.
Additionally your webapp also has the data of the user hostage so the user can not switch to a competitor.
So basicly I think webapps are a dark pattern. The user of course prefers desktopapps but due to above reasons there is hardly incentive to build them.
Will this change?
I think so yes. Eventually this whole Saas bubble will burst, because
- Chrome filesystem API will make building a desktop app as easy as a webapp
- Open source and crowd funded software will pay the bill for those making desktop apps and users will be more then willing to switch.
When will this happen?
If we are lucky within 5 years, but more likely 20 or 30 years.
Yes true! I once had the honour to work with a 'tech-lead' dev that rewrote a whole map application to AngularJS, which was the hype back then.
I remember him not being able to get a just slightly complicated chain of asynchronous stuff working in vanillaJS.
No problem, because he had AngularJS double binding now. No need to learn vanillaJS. Wicked stuff.
I would like to add:
Increases range for sending and receiving communication via air.
This in addition the the already mentioned:
- greater field of sight (eye of Sauron)
- greater range of fire
- symbolic (to heaven)
- status symbol
- defense against enemy
I remember this scene from movie 3 lotr where the 2 wizards communicate to each other to invade, by shooting beams from their towers.
Average websites goal is now to keep you on them as long as possible. According to some metric folks, the longer you stay on a website the more money you spend there. Linking to another website destroys that metric.
Also if you are going to make a purchase somewhere, any website would try to get a cut of the money you spend by actually sending referral links to the product. So small websites that do not allow this service will not get linked so much.
On a metalevel it is thus that links or connections between items are information. Information is money. And as soon as that became evident links and connections also became more scarce.
"But another part of me isn't okay with a world in which the vast majority of people do nothing (or do something that doesn't really produce value) while forcing higher-income people (like many of us, myself included) to fund that lifestyle."
But I feel it is the other way around really. Low income people support the lifestyle of all us "highly educated".
I feel the biggest amount of us programmers / managers are really creating little value, but are nonetheless rewarded by a vast institution of governments and corporations.
I am sometimes thinking about use master branch of my repo and add a folder called 'tickets'. Then in this folder create issues as markdown files. Use some Vscode, Emacs or Vim plugin to automatically number these markdown files and present comments as lists.
No more dependency on online saas tooling and you can use the search option of your ide / os / command-line to search through them.
You are right, but very traditional. Try to think in a modern spirit.
If the logo can be created for by a few hundred bugs of ai service there is no need for it to last longer then a few months.
Also traditional logos were created for print. If you are a 'onscreen only' company, there is really no need for a simple logo. (dont bother about asset size when the average website includes several mb of spam and js frameworks)
Further I would not know why a ai would eventually not be capable of generating a 'simple' logo with just blezer curves and few colors.
Lastly I think many of these 'simple logos' are boring. I admit I prefer the ai logos from the post. Yes call me a barbarian and yes the human drawn logo's could probably be better if made by a top notch designer (and costs $$$$$).
The future will probably be a hybrid situation where the designer is aided by ai.
Having myself used some no/low-code tools (service-now, mendix, outsystems), I do think they are the future, but...
I think they suffer from their business model, which often aims complete vendor lock in to milk their customers as long as possible. This is currently their only way to earn back the hard invested money of developing such a tool.
We need a, open source, community driven, no-code tool.
Using existing tools I often suffered from these things:
- closed source.
- expensive monthly fees.
- Any apps build with it are not really property of the developer, but are intellectual property of the low code tool corp
- either bad ux ui or not horizontally or vertically scalable
- Datamodel, Algorithm or business logic can not really be extracted from the low code platform.
- You now need to become a specialist in this low code platform. These low code platforms outdate faster then the typical programming language.
- The best developers look down on it so you get "lesser" developers.
- If a feature is not available in the low code platform then you are stuck.
- If there is a real bug in the low code platform you are screwed because you now need to open a ticket, but the engineer looking at the ticket is more help-desk then engineer. The majority of tickets they solve are from dummies not understanding the platform and they assume you are one of them. Will take several months to convince them it was a bug and was never solved during the time I was on the project (2 years).
- You cannot run it on premise, unless you have deep pockets
- They have non or terrible git integration. Or other collaboration problems.
- Due to their dynamic nature are often slow in performance.
- Corps HR department runs a different low code platform then their finance department and now it becomes a political shit show.
Terrible situation when you grow beyond the low-code platform and need to move away from it.
The problem is that these neighborhoods were build when the global population was half the size it is now and spending behavior was way different then it is now.
It is no longer profitable to have a shoe repair shop in the neighborhood. Nobody repairs shoes, everyone buys new online. You cannot get these old times back.
The solution?
Look at the Asian urbs. High rise apartment buildings with the first 1 or 2 floors shops. The dense population will make these shops attractive again because dense population causes high demand for convenience-shops. The shops in turn will make the neighborhood attractive for city dwellers. The shops also cause the streets never be empty so crime / vandalism drops. Then it attracts tourists and creates jobs.
Now move all the parking and roads underground and make all the roof tops green public parks and voila!
But, what do we do instead? We yank car-oriented flat suburbs and shopping malls all over the place. Those will be the trash-towns of tomorrow.
I think many comments (and also researchers in the comment articles) are rejecting the idea of an troll like neanderthal too fast.
Yes, some details are rather fantasy then based on real research, but the overall idea makes sense.
Controversy around why the neanderthal went extinct exists for a while now.
I think it is very unlikely that a successful human-like species goes extinct without a fight. They where stronger and bigger then homo sapiens.
If it is true that they replaced homo sapiens as the dominant species for a while then maybe they are not the friendly giants they are thought to be. Even homo sapiens cannibalize, so that some physically stronger Neanderthals would also do this seems not unlikely.
The last neanderthals might have lived in relic populations in north eurasia until several thousand years ago without leaving much archeological evidence.
Also oral traditions might survive for very very long.
But yeah, maybe it is not so politically correct to 'talk bad' about a race that fell victim to genocide. We rather focus on the positive things about them.
When enough green pastures are around animals usually reproduce till that is no longer the case and they need to move to other pastures. They continue doing this untill all green pastures are occupied. After this they start competing with one another to compete for the green pastures already occupied. Some animals will be so succesfull that they take larger green pastures, letting others starve. If by some miraclelous event (ai?) suddenly a lot of green pastures arise, animals will simply reproduce again till they occupied all green pastures again.
Looking at us? The agraric revolution, neither the Industrial revolution, nor this ai revolution have decreased how much we work on our 'jobs' (finding food indirectly). All it did was increasing the population so that all green pastures became occupied.