Do we really need to keep pandering to the people who block JavaScript and fonts?
At some point it's on them to live with their choices. And just from my small sample size (I doubt there's a large sample anywhere), those people are more interested in complaining about their self-inflicted woes than engaging with the content.
I ran Ms-01s with 100GBE, copper DACs in my kubernetes cluster. Killed the NVME drives in that tiny box. I'd bet the same issue doing this with FW. And I wasn't even pushing 100GBE very hard at all, it was mostly for fun.
AI + 100GBE (under load) + tiny box = unreliable and eead very quickly.
That was my experience with Fable as well. Pulled my extremely complex project that I could squint and see was possible, but actually put mathematical concreteness to things in a way I could only intuit.
On the flip side, visualizers have always fascinated me. I love this one, but one build off I've always wanted to see: analyze the entire file a priori, and then generate the visuals. Sort of like a normalization pass, but getting longer form structures decoded ahead of time could be pretty neat.
Apple is actually interesting. They are one of the few companies with a chip / PC play with real power AND basically no play I'm the hyperscalar market.
That means they're actually incentivized at least short term, to benefit PCs becoming strong enough to do local LLMs. Which makes this play make even more sense. Though, I've been saying for a while that the local AI inflectiom point is the death knell for these frontier labs.
Things are worse than ever. And these types of opinions are just Ostrich strategies. This worked fine 20 years ago, and would be a wildly inappropriate and irresponsible way to live today.
Yes, a lot of the news is sensationalized and blown out of proportion.
But also YES, things are absolutely trending in the wrong direction and you should both be aware of that and be loudly screaming about it. Going to protests, boycotting companies run by these CEOs leading us into oligarchy, and letting people know your stance.
The idea that "I can't do anything about it, so I'll just bury my head in the sand" is the rhetoric that the people benefitting from rigging the system want you to have. It makes it easier for them to screw you over.
No, your brain was neven designed for this much bad news. It also wasn't designed for the Internet, tv, smartphones, processed food, soda, painting, sleeping in a bed, to infinity. It's a garbage argument that falls apart at first glance.
Edit to add: I highly recommend meditation and days off from technology. But the answer is not what many people in this thread are proposing. Steve Bannon's "flood the zone" strategy is winning.
If this makes Elon a trillionaire then he's not the first. All those NFT bros listing their stickers for trillions each have him beat by orders of magnitudes.
Just because people have a vague idea of what someone's job is and a deep understanding of their own job, it feels like AI can replace everyone but you.
Software engineering is the practice of taking a concrete problem, converting it into a set of rules (a world model), and then converting those rules into something a computer can execute for a human user.
As long as AI cannot dynamically generate a true world model on the fly, it will continue to fall short.
As I've started a greenfield project lately, and it's been almost entirely LLM driven development, I have concluded that there is no process or step that actually enables them to actually understand a problem.
Humans can think abstractly, parsing a problem space and condensing it into a solution. That is, I can take 10 different seemingly unrelated problems, and determine they're all the same class of problem, and then create a novel (ish) solution for that problem. LLMs simply cannot build that world model AND even when explicitly told the solution, they can't actually hold the model while authoring code.
They're fake thinking, and no amount of harnesses, or increasing the number of models is going to change that.
There was a post here before: tech companies have become adept at taking a thick thing (like friendship) and boxing it up to give you the same surface level feelings but it's not _real_ it's a thin version (following an influencer, social media). And you feel like you're friends with these people, but real friendships are not so simple, they're not so messy.
LLMs are robbing us of thick thinking and convincing us that thin thinking is something real. I don't think anyone can legitimately claim that LLMs are improving their product's actual problem modeling space, beyond just being a randomness / entropy generator where a human can actually choose.
Human written books, code, art are fundamentally shaped by having a true understanding of the abstract problem space and compressing it down it a way that makes sense to other humans. LLMs are just word salad masquerading as intelligence. Letting them into our world is a mistake that will take years to correct.
People said the exact same thing about web searches, and I think there's a lot of devs who would instant search for every issue they hit.
Isn't this just better web search?
On the other hand, it definitely feels like it might be too big a step in the spoon feeding direction.
Writing code without AI feels like art, and writing it with AI feels like painting a wall: get it done quickly, cheaply, and good enough that people don't see issues.
It's the art part of engineering that's being lost, AI has no appreciation of elegance. It has no empathy for cognitive overhead of bad code or poor-fit design patterns.