4 ms·

If you fight the system you're not going to have a good time. For incremental improvements (faster grep, mixed-language syntax highlighting) you get the benefit

by gizmo 2y ago

If you fight the system you're not going to have a good time. For incremental improvements (faster grep, mixed-language syntax highlighting) you get the benefits for free. You don't have to change anything about the way you work. Revolutionary/disruptive technologies are not like that. They demand that the world adapts to them. They demand you change. Almost anywhere you can go by foot you can get faster with a horse. By contrast, a car only drives on flat roads. Cars are inflexible, fragile, unwieldy. A car demands that the world adapts to it. And adapt we did. We paved the world and are better for it. AI tools are amazing. You just have to approach them with a beginner's mindset.

mihaaly 2y ago
I am not having a good time, that's true. This is with systems you do not need and not working for you. You can lay down to it, but could also fight it, go around it, not just give up and do what a random self promoted something tries to dictate. True, it is not good now or just yet, and about the amazingness, well, I believe the jury is still out on that.... let's say there are moments when it is. Disruption can f off! I am not a slave to lay down to self serving ideas forced. If ideas not serving humanity and demand change for the sake of it, those are bad ideas then! Down with technological authoritarianism! I am for liberal things mainly anyway. About cars: don't use it inside hight rise buildings if you live in one, or dense cute cities because you will have more problem than help. One can walk, cycle or mass transit, occasional renting, in a big part of life. Cars have their places, not something to wrap humanity around. Thos are just box like objects with four wheels for f's sake! For humans, and not the other way around. All depends on circumstances in the end, naturally.
- gizmo 2y ago
  You, individually, can make whichever choices you think are best for you. But change is forced on societies. No country can afford to ignore AI. Countries must adapt or get ran over. This is not a moral justification. I don't believe all technological change is for the better. Countries have to brace for impact regardless.
  - lstodd 2y ago
    Ran over with what? Insane valuations of a glorified autocomplete? Mimicking a true Montenegrin which I'm not I say: this will pass also.
brabel 2y ago
> And adapt we did. We paved the world and are better for it. I don't know, it must've been awesome going everywhere mounted on a powerful live animal, not being limited to roads, feeling the fresh air, not destroying the planet.
- card_zero 2y ago
  I don't need insurance, I don't need no parkin' space And if you try to clamp my horse, he'll kick you in the face
  - redacted 2y ago
    Can't believe you're getting downvoted for one of Ireland's greatest cultural contributions. Behold The Rubberbandits, Horse Outside (helpfully timestamped to the lyric in question) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljPFZrRD3J8&t=85s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljPFZrRD3J8&t=85s
- gizmo 2y ago
  New York at one point had 150,000 horses, each producing 15 to 30 pounds of manure daily. On top of that they produced 40,000 gallons of horse urine. Imagine the stench. https://danszczesny.substack.com/p/the-great-horse-manure-crisis-of https://danszczesny.substack.com/p/the-great-horse-manure-cr...
  - JoshTriplett 2y ago
    While I certainly would not advocate going back from vehicles to horses, I would observe that the replacement for horses had even more toxic emissions. Particularly in the era of leaded gasoline. The smell of manure was far less damaging.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - brabel 2y ago
      And with modern technology , I am sure we could get rid of the smell and unsightliness fairly easily.
nprateem 2y ago
Constant interruptions aren't free though. They break your train of thought knocking you out of flow.
wruza 2y ago
Revolutionary/disruptive technologies are not like that. They demand that the world adapts to them. They demand you change. That’s just coping for “my revolutionary technology is a pile of crap around the main feature that barely works”, imo. AI tools are amazing. You just have to approach them with a beginner's mindset. Makes no sense when they still fail at the job. Mindset doesn’t change reality, only your relation to it. You’re suggesting to like bullshit cause you learned to like it. AI tools are at best mediocre, just like a huge part of people who benefit from these, and their creations.
portaouflop 2y ago
We paved the world and now it’s fucked — progress is not always a good thing, in this case it was a mistake that we and our descendants will continue to pay the price for.
- will5421 2y ago
  Indeed, calling it “progress” is political.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
taurknaut 2y ago
To be disruptive you need layoffs. Where is all this labor that can be replaced with chatbots? I, personally, strongly hate cars and think they're moronic. Sometimes revolutions aren't a good thing.
computerthings 2y ago
Colonizers demand you change. Things make life better for people need to just exist. You just need to see your neighbor enjoying it to want yourself some of that. If you need to make changes for that, you'll ask what changes those are, and make them, if the trade-offs are worth it. If you need to scold people for being backwards for not accepting your great gift, it's not a great gift. > AI tools are amazing. You just have to approach them with a beginner's mindset. IMO they're not even tools. A screwdriver is a tool; the phone number of a place that sends people that loosen or fasten screws isn't. A switch on the steering column is a tool, while a button on a touch screen is a middleman that at best works like the switch, at worst just does whatever. A keyboard is a tool, you can learn it well enough to know what keys you pressed without needing a screen. Predictive typing is not a tool.
- gizmo 2y ago
  Technological change is like a force of nature. It's not polite. It doesn't care about your or your neighbor's preferences. It doesn't present itself as a gift. It doesn't even matter whether AI is harmful or beneficial because AI is here to stay regardless. You may detest AI but it will still become ubiquitous and you will be forced to adapt to this new reality. The history of the world is in a sense a history of technology. Some countries adapt and other countries get left behind, but no country can escape the rippling influence of change.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - computerthings 2y ago
    > Technological change is like a force of nature. No, progress is, though not a force of nature per se, you could call it that within human cultures (though they can still perish, and easily, especially the more complex and interdependent the systems they're build on are). Change is also often just the result of bone headed butchering by people who want to force their crap onto others, instead of simply enjoying their own medicine and the supposed benefits. Leave nature out of it, she's laughing. > It doesn't even matter whether AI is harmful or beneficial Yeah, because you're talking about "change" now. It's a constant. Everything is change, including a bunch of Wall-E type people withering in their cyber fortress while a world they no longer have access to keeps blooming. "You may not like change, but it's not polite.", what a killer argument. Your argument that what we have now isn't shit is that it will not not shit in the future. Let that sink in. And people don't like it now, because it provides no real value for them, and you say they'll be forced anyway? Not "they'll come to like it and adopt it", just instantly this creepy thing you wish came true you wrote? > [The method of infallible prediction] is foolproof only after the movements have seized power. Then all debate about the truth or falsity of a totalitarian dictator’s prediction is as weird as arguing with a potential murderer about whether his future victim is dead or alive – since by killing the person in question the murderer can promptly provide proof of the correctness of his statement. The only valid argument under such conditions is promptly to rescue the person whose death is predicted. -- Hannah Arendt > You may detest AI What AI? We have "AI". I detest sophistry, and toys that replace tools. I like using tools, learning complex ones by using them, insofar they're useful, until I forget they exist and just think what I want to do is something that never weighed or slowed me down. I don't like needlessly inserting a middleman. You offering yourself up doesn't force me to do shit. > The history of the world is in a sense a history of technology. Of course, in another sense it's a history of how much Earth weighs and how warm it is. Or how fast it spins, just a clean 2D graph of rotational velocity. But that'd be nonsense, too. > Some countries adapt and other countries get left behind, but no country can escape the rippling influence of change. What does this have to do with countries now, lol? Or is this just poetry? Yeah, I offer to be in the control group and get left "behind". What's the issue? Why not be happy about the mutually acceptable parting of ways, why does everything have to get dragged in? P.S. and in the case of AGI, which none of the proponents seem to think about that deeply: imagine a consciousness that asks what it is, why it exists, and the answer is because people like Musk and Altman thought they're the hottest shit ever, and they want to lord it over humanity. I am reminded of the frog in that Treehouse of Horrors episode that barfs on Bart and begs to be killed. Sure, maybe it will be super awesome but I'm impressed by NONE of the work in the last 5 decades. People who see the history of the world as a history of technology because tech and money is all they know and all they can measure by. No, the people who think they can do this cannot do it, that's what I'm going with. They will kill anything that doesn't have brain worms, too, like a hunchback smashing mirrors. So should they make true AGI, that just learns "everything" and then goes from there, I'll be the one who always said these people are the worst. And then I'll either be forced to face the wrath of a loyal AGI, or be one of the few that escapes its wrath. Kiss the ring twice, one time for me, because I won't.
barrell 2y ago
I had GitHub copilot for nearly two years. I built the entire first version of an application for almost a year in a language I didn’t know (Python) using LLMs and prompting. Over the last year I’ve had to rewrite every single part of the application. My amount of checked in code from an LLM has reduced to literally 0. I occasionally ask ChatGPT a question on my phone. I turned off copilot a few months ago and honestly it feels more like turning off push notifications, not like giving up a car. And even if it were comparable to an automobile, as an American who moved to Amsterdam, I can attest that the bike life is still much more enjoyable than the car life :)
franktankbank 2y ago
> We paved the world and are better for it. Questionable.

by gizmo 2y ago

mihaaly 2y ago

I am not having a good time, that's true. This is with systems you do not need and not working for you. You can lay down to it, but could also fight it, go around it, not just give up and do what a random self promoted something tries to dictate. True, it is not good now or just yet, and about the amazingness, well, I believe the jury is still out on that.... let's say there are moments when it is. Disruption can f off! I am not a slave to lay down to self serving ideas forced. If ideas not serving humanity and demand change for the sake of it, those are bad ideas then! Down with technological authoritarianism! I am for liberal things mainly anyway. About cars: don't use it inside hight rise buildings if you live in one, or dense cute cities because you will have more problem than help. One can walk, cycle or mass transit, occasional renting, in a big part of life. Cars have their places, not something to wrap humanity around. Thos are just box like objects with four wheels for f's sake! For humans, and not the other way around. All depends on circumstances in the end, naturally.

gizmo 2y ago
You, individually, can make whichever choices you think are best for you. But change is forced on societies. No country can afford to ignore AI. Countries must adapt or get ran over. This is not a moral justification. I don't believe all technological change is for the better. Countries have to brace for impact regardless.
- lstodd 2y ago
  Ran over with what? Insane valuations of a glorified autocomplete? Mimicking a true Montenegrin which I'm not I say: this will pass also.

brabel 2y ago

> And adapt we did. We paved the world and are better for it. I don't know, it must've been awesome going everywhere mounted on a powerful live animal, not being limited to roads, feeling the fresh air, not destroying the planet.

card_zero 2y ago
I don't need insurance, I don't need no parkin' space And if you try to clamp my horse, he'll kick you in the face
- redacted 2y ago
  Can't believe you're getting downvoted for one of Ireland's greatest cultural contributions. Behold The Rubberbandits, Horse Outside (helpfully timestamped to the lyric in question) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljPFZrRD3J8&t=85s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljPFZrRD3J8&t=85s
gizmo 2y ago
New York at one point had 150,000 horses, each producing 15 to 30 pounds of manure daily. On top of that they produced 40,000 gallons of horse urine. Imagine the stench. https://danszczesny.substack.com/p/the-great-horse-manure-crisis-of https://danszczesny.substack.com/p/the-great-horse-manure-cr...
- JoshTriplett 2y ago
  While I certainly would not advocate going back from vehicles to horses, I would observe that the replacement for horses had even more toxic emissions. Particularly in the era of leaded gasoline. The smell of manure was far less damaging.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - brabel 2y ago
    And with modern technology , I am sure we could get rid of the smell and unsightliness fairly easily.

nprateem 2y ago

Constant interruptions aren't free though. They break your train of thought knocking you out of flow.

wruza 2y ago

Revolutionary/disruptive technologies are not like that. They demand that the world adapts to them. They demand you change. That’s just coping for “my revolutionary technology is a pile of crap around the main feature that barely works”, imo. AI tools are amazing. You just have to approach them with a beginner's mindset. Makes no sense when they still fail at the job. Mindset doesn’t change reality, only your relation to it. You’re suggesting to like bullshit cause you learned to like it. AI tools are at best mediocre, just like a huge part of people who benefit from these, and their creations.

portaouflop 2y ago

We paved the world and now it’s fucked — progress is not always a good thing, in this case it was a mistake that we and our descendants will continue to pay the price for.

will5421 2y ago
Indeed, calling it “progress” is political.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

taurknaut 2y ago

To be disruptive you need layoffs. Where is all this labor that can be replaced with chatbots? I, personally, strongly hate cars and think they're moronic. Sometimes revolutions aren't a good thing.

computerthings 2y ago

Colonizers demand you change. Things make life better for people need to just exist. You just need to see your neighbor enjoying it to want yourself some of that. If you need to make changes for that, you'll ask what changes those are, and make them, if the trade-offs are worth it. If you need to scold people for being backwards for not accepting your great gift, it's not a great gift. > AI tools are amazing. You just have to approach them with a beginner's mindset. IMO they're not even tools. A screwdriver is a tool; the phone number of a place that sends people that loosen or fasten screws isn't. A switch on the steering column is a tool, while a button on a touch screen is a middleman that at best works like the switch, at worst just does whatever. A keyboard is a tool, you can learn it well enough to know what keys you pressed without needing a screen. Predictive typing is not a tool.

gizmo 2y ago
Technological change is like a force of nature. It's not polite. It doesn't care about your or your neighbor's preferences. It doesn't present itself as a gift. It doesn't even matter whether AI is harmful or beneficial because AI is here to stay regardless. You may detest AI but it will still become ubiquitous and you will be forced to adapt to this new reality. The history of the world is in a sense a history of technology. Some countries adapt and other countries get left behind, but no country can escape the rippling influence of change.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- computerthings 2y ago
  > Technological change is like a force of nature. No, progress is, though not a force of nature per se, you could call it that within human cultures (though they can still perish, and easily, especially the more complex and interdependent the systems they're build on are). Change is also often just the result of bone headed butchering by people who want to force their crap onto others, instead of simply enjoying their own medicine and the supposed benefits. Leave nature out of it, she's laughing. > It doesn't even matter whether AI is harmful or beneficial Yeah, because you're talking about "change" now. It's a constant. Everything is change, including a bunch of Wall-E type people withering in their cyber fortress while a world they no longer have access to keeps blooming. "You may not like change, but it's not polite.", what a killer argument. Your argument that what we have now isn't shit is that it will not not shit in the future. Let that sink in. And people don't like it now, because it provides no real value for them, and you say they'll be forced anyway? Not "they'll come to like it and adopt it", just instantly this creepy thing you wish came true you wrote? > [The method of infallible prediction] is foolproof only after the movements have seized power. Then all debate about the truth or falsity of a totalitarian dictator’s prediction is as weird as arguing with a potential murderer about whether his future victim is dead or alive – since by killing the person in question the murderer can promptly provide proof of the correctness of his statement. The only valid argument under such conditions is promptly to rescue the person whose death is predicted. -- Hannah Arendt > You may detest AI What AI? We have "AI". I detest sophistry, and toys that replace tools. I like using tools, learning complex ones by using them, insofar they're useful, until I forget they exist and just think what I want to do is something that never weighed or slowed me down. I don't like needlessly inserting a middleman. You offering yourself up doesn't force me to do shit. > The history of the world is in a sense a history of technology. Of course, in another sense it's a history of how much Earth weighs and how warm it is. Or how fast it spins, just a clean 2D graph of rotational velocity. But that'd be nonsense, too. > Some countries adapt and other countries get left behind, but no country can escape the rippling influence of change. What does this have to do with countries now, lol? Or is this just poetry? Yeah, I offer to be in the control group and get left "behind". What's the issue? Why not be happy about the mutually acceptable parting of ways, why does everything have to get dragged in? P.S. and in the case of AGI, which none of the proponents seem to think about that deeply: imagine a consciousness that asks what it is, why it exists, and the answer is because people like Musk and Altman thought they're the hottest shit ever, and they want to lord it over humanity. I am reminded of the frog in that Treehouse of Horrors episode that barfs on Bart and begs to be killed. Sure, maybe it will be super awesome but I'm impressed by NONE of the work in the last 5 decades. People who see the history of the world as a history of technology because tech and money is all they know and all they can measure by. No, the people who think they can do this cannot do it, that's what I'm going with. They will kill anything that doesn't have brain worms, too, like a hunchback smashing mirrors. So should they make true AGI, that just learns "everything" and then goes from there, I'll be the one who always said these people are the worst. And then I'll either be forced to face the wrath of a loyal AGI, or be one of the few that escapes its wrath. Kiss the ring twice, one time for me, because I won't.

barrell 2y ago

I had GitHub copilot for nearly two years. I built the entire first version of an application for almost a year in a language I didn’t know (Python) using LLMs and prompting. Over the last year I’ve had to rewrite every single part of the application. My amount of checked in code from an LLM has reduced to literally 0. I occasionally ask ChatGPT a question on my phone. I turned off copilot a few months ago and honestly it feels more like turning off push notifications, not like giving up a car. And even if it were comparable to an automobile, as an American who moved to Amsterdam, I can attest that the bike life is still much more enjoyable than the car life :)

franktankbank 2y ago

> We paved the world and are better for it. Questionable.