The amount of self owning that is happening to AI companies is crazy.
I don't understand why their marketing department/execs can't see the conflict between claiming AI is going to take all jobs, that the model is super dangerous and AI hate among the general public, increased governmental oversight.
Anthropic is guilty of the latter but the former applies to most of these AI companies.
The short of it is that cooling is likely the biggest problem, given you will need to pump the heat to the backside and radiate it away, and the amount of mass you will need to dedicate to cooling works against deployments and increases the cost per unit significantly. Not to mention, the idea of these huge deployments runs into potential space debris issues.
Whenever one of these ventures actually manages to launch a proof of concept, I think we'll be able to quickly discern if there is actually a near-future here.
I love ruby. It's certainly not sentimental; I enjoy writing it and working in it, certainly a lot more than javascript.
I do feel like these sorts of attacks on ruby are quite weird. It's totally ok not to enjoy working in any particular programming language, but I wonder what the angle is to write about it is.
Arguments regarding ruby's successes are always so weird to me. Github, Twitter, Coinbase, and Shopify are all examples of great success. Challenges with scaling are successful problems.
It's a great tool and if you read this, consider and evaluate if ruby is appropriate for your next project. :)
I need to see a video of what people are doing to hit the max limits regularly.
I find sonnet really useful for coding but I never even hit basic limits. at $20/mo. Writing specs, coming up with documentation, doing wrote tasks for which many examples exist in the database. Iterate on particular services etc.
Are these max users having it write the whole codebase w/ rewrites? Isn't it often just faster to fix small things I find incorrect than type up why I think it's wrong in English and have it do a whole big round trip?
Junior devs using AI can get a lot better at using AI and learn those existing patterns it generates, but I notice, for myself, that if I let AI write a lot of the code I remember and thereby understand it later on less well. This applies in school and when trying to learn new things but the act of writing down the solution and working out the details yourself trains our own brain. I'd say that this has been a practice for over a thousand years and I'm skeptical that this will make junior devs grow their own skills faster.
I think asking questions to the AI for your own understanding totally makes sense, but there is a benefit when you actually create the code versus asking the AI to do it.
From the recent tesla acme test, where the tesla runs into a wall containing a picture of a road, they also tested rain and water blocking two mannequins. The lidar equipped vehicle managed to stop before hitting the mannequins while tesla's autopilot did not. The distance before automatic braking triggered was reduced iirc.
Sure lidar is degraded by rain, but I think the conclusion that when it rains the whole system will degrade to just cameras seems incorrect. It may reduce its effective range but it seems likely to still have some advantage in a wide range of conditions.
I don't feel that you have a measured take on what is basically browser tooling. It's a customized browser built around web development. Is that _so_ insane?
Imagine someone came out with a browser that synced and allowed you to view/test your app in the days of ie6/7/8/9 across all those browsers. Would charging money per month for that be so weird?
This isn't for anyone to use as their normal browser.
I'm afraid you've thought more about react-router than the maintainers about the people using it.
I feel like the tradeoff has historically been between smaller, more composable libraries with more breaking changes and larger, more feature-filled libraries that move more slowly and care about their users.
react-router is the epitome of choosing the worst of both worlds with a healthy dose of disdain for their users.
It's one of those things where once you have used it, you will notice it. Given most iOS users aren't swapping between pro and non pro models, it's not something you think about.
I'm really glad Garmin exists and makes smartwatches. The broad approach they have to market segments has created really great products that serve markets other large tech manufacturers haven't really touched. I'm sure the Apple watch is a good product but I'm uninterested in a general notification device (what I take to be the function of a smartwatch). I've used my farming for hiking, paragliding, tracking sleep, connecting to my bike trainer, etc. It tracks all my activities and is my dedicated device for anything athletic. The athletic features, good battery life, and sleep tracking have made it so that I actually wear a watch all the time. Spent $700 4 years ago and it was totally worth it. Perhaps the only caveat for Garmin is that I don't need to upgrade. It does everything I want it to without issue.
I kinda disagree with this. I have definitely noticed that my cursor can be slow to respond when some linting/formatting (I can't quite tell what is causing it, I just notice it) is going on. Totally usable, but I'm also coming from emacs and it's not like emacs is known to be blazing fast so I actually think my experience is sort of inline with the article's point.
Despite or because of emacs being older, it's more responsive than vscode in my usage.
I don't understand why their marketing department/execs can't see the conflict between claiming AI is going to take all jobs, that the model is super dangerous and AI hate among the general public, increased governmental oversight.
Anthropic is guilty of the latter but the former applies to most of these AI companies.