I liked the article overall but found it a little wishy-washy in some of the conclusions.
> People do not want to wake up every day and log in to Slack and find the buttons and menus all subtly moved around. People do not want financial transactions that complete most of the time. Determinism is not going anywhere, my friends.
Well, I can't reconcile people not wanting things moving around and determinism with the promises of acceleration made by AI. The way I see it either AI makes "massive, discontinuous returns on investment" by way of changing things or we get a sustainable rate of change; these seem like contradicting goals to me.
This looks very interesting. I’m not sure I understand this, but it seems to me like it competes (or is in the same space as) both Tailscale and zeromq/nanomsg via the protocols? I think it would be nice to have a comparison page to make it easier to position it (I didn’t find one).
From an economic perspective productivity is defined as the creation of value isn't it? Then if you "improve productivity" and does not create value in the end you're no improving productivity at all.
Maybe instead of people picking up AI mannerism people will start training on what makes AI gives correct results and human communication will look like prompting.
If AI is all the thing people keep saying someone should be able to develop an Animate/Flash clone, right? Given the reaction to its discontinuation, how people seem to depend on it, and how much content is out there it seem like the incentives do exist.
Socials: - github.com/andrematheus - t.me/amatheus - x.com/andrermatheus - bsky.app/profile/andrematheus - linkedin.com/in/andreroquem
Interests: Technology, Programming, Open Source, Mobile Development, Hacking, Freelancing, Books, Art
---