I find it troubling that we’re apparently reaching this level of learned helplessness where it’s considered unreasonable to assume the user is able to start a container instance.
Single-issue voting is something I consider a very large threat to the democratic process in the US, and is also something that both parties have become exceedingly good at creating in the elctorate.
The reason I consider it a threat is that it allows either party to meta-game the fact that many voters can be persuaded to vote against their own interests.
This reads like a grievance to me, so I’ll say—-I’m sorry, your company sounds like it sucks. Your skills are still valuable, I hope you can find somewhere else that values them.
Somebodies are already making “loops” <facepalm> that will add the noise back. If PR isn’t merged in <time> close and open a new one, either the same one or a new one of higher priority.
If <time> is set low enough, the noise still exists
I agree, we screwed up nuclear policy here in the US but I wouldn’t say it was solely “vibes.” Three Mile Island wasn’t Chernobyl, but it also wasn’t nothing. Still, an unfortunate long-term outcome is that nuclear energy became a non starter.
Data centers, on the other hand, are essentially a blight wherever they are deployed. Everyone I know would spend extra to move away from one, but they tend to be deployed in areas of low mobility.
At the beginning of this blog I knew the author spoke regularly in French with at least one human regularly. When I stopped reading I was no longer certain they speak French with any humans. I hope they decide to speak to humans in French again someday.
John Carmack will never have to live near a data center’s constant droning noise. He’ll never have to breathe the toxic poison spewed by its gas turbines. He won’t be feel the impact of rising energy prices.
Feels like a another out of touch ivory tower argument from another generational talent that filled their bags ages ago and no longer relates to common folk.
It was difficult to finish reading your post after you put the OP down for stating that they believe they're more original and more capable than an LLM. Maybe leave that part out next time, or at least don't lead with it. It does not help your argument the way you think it does.
I wonder why you would mince your words about LLM use at all though. Instead of couching your methods in language like, "I 'built' a program," or, "I've 'crafted' a novel," you ought to just put your money where your mouth is and say, "I used LLMs to make [something]."
If want to be up-front and proud about the fact that you use LLMs in your work, just dot that without indirection or ornamentation. Wear that attitude on your sleeve and let your audience determine if your work is worth their attention.
Just my personal take on this, but I’d happily perform real work for free instead of sitting for leetcodes and behavioral questions. I struggle with those formats a lot but have no problems shipping in a realistic problem domain.
That tradeoff makes enough economic sense to me personally, but to each their own.
I do agree that companies flush with profit should be able to offer a stipend though, and unwillingness to do so is a signal I use to evaluate them.
I suspect these reasons are just more AI-washing of a mass layoffs indicative of pandemic-era business mismanagement, but supposing they aren’t…
Watch Cloudflare closely and hold Matthew Prince accountable to all of these statements. If LLMs enhance their builders while simultaneously making their measurers redundant, investors should expect record business growth, drastically fewer outages, and few if any security and compliance fails.