10 ms·
Andrej Karpathy's talk on the future of the industry
- pudiklubi 1y agoFor context - I was in the audience when Karpathy gave this amazing talk on software 3.0. YC has said the official video will take a few weeks to release, by which Karpathy himself said the talk will be deprecated. https://x.com/karpathy/status/1935077692258558443 https://x.com/karpathy/status/1935077692258558443
- levocardia 1y agoTo complete the loop, we need an AI avatar of Karpathy doing text-to-voice from the transcript. Who says AI can't boost productivity!
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- msgodel 1y agoI listened to it with an old fashion CMU speech synth.
- chrisweekly 1y agoDo the talk's predictions about the future of the industry project beyond a few weeks? If so, I'd expect the salient points of the talk to remain valid. Hmm...
- swyx 1y agoi synced the slides with the talk transcript here : https://latent.space/s3 https://latent.space/s3
- pudiklubi 1y agoso you took my transcript and put it behind a newsletter sub? haha. just share them!
- swyx 1y agonot quite, i compiled the slides within a few hours of the talk yesterday well before your transcript was available. the slides are my main output/contribution. a full slides+transcript is too long for substack. i've linked your transcript prominently for people to find, and used it to fix slide ordering because twitter people took terrible notes for the purpose of exact talk reconstruction. i exepct YC to prioritize publishing this talk so propbably the half life of any of this work is measured in days anyway. 100% of our podcast is published for free, but we still have ~1000 people who choose to support our work with a subscription (it does help pay for editors, equipment, and travel). I always feel bad that we dont have much content for them so i figured i'd put just the slide compilation up for subscribers. i'm trying to find nice ways to ramp up value for our subs over time, mostly by showing "work in progress" things like this that i had to do anyway to summarize/internalize the talk properly - which again is what we published entirely free/no subscription required
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- pudiklubi 1y agogotcha. def a good idea! i'm only a bit wary of making all of this a bit too put together, as to create an official source before there is one. that being said, HN is a negative place, and not what I was trying to go for. thank you for your work with the slides!
- dang 1y agoLet's all make HN a less negative place. (As a step towards making it a non-negative place.)
- fellatio 1y agoLooks like you are putting a derivative behind a paywall though, no? I think quid pro quo let pudiklubi publish your work too? Some kind of open license?
- swyx 1y ago
- theyinwhy 1y agoWhat a poor judgement he must have if his outlook becomes irrelevant in a few weeks' time. Edit: the emoji at the end of the original sentence has not been quoted. How a smile makes the difference. Original tweet: https://x.com/karpathy/status/1935077692258558443 https://x.com/karpathy/status/1935077692258558443
- theturtletalks 1y agoIt was in jest, more a take of how quickly things move in AI
- qwertox 1y agoWe better stop talking about the future then.
- scottyah 1y agoEvery time you talk about the future, it gets altered.
- amarait 1y agoHard determinists would disagree
- koakuma-chan 1y agoEven if universe is not deterministic, what he said still does not make sense because him talking about future is part of destiny.
- addaon 1y agoThey basically have to.
- pudiklubi 1y agothe way I read it it's more about how fast examples and references become irrelevant. fundamentals of the speech not.
- swah 1y agoSee also https://www.latent.space/p/s3 https://www.latent.space/p/s3
- swyx 1y agothanks - i've now also updated the powerpoint with matched transcript to slides - so we are now fully confident in the slide order and you can basically watch the talk with slides
- swah 1y agoIt didn't take weeks this time https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCEmiRjPEtQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCEmiRjPEtQ
- pudiklubi 1y agohaha, love how we have the two pieces of the puzzle. we should merge!
- fenghorn 1y agoFirst time using NotebookLM and it blew my mind. I pasted in the OP's transcription of the talk into NotebookLM and got this "podcast": https://notebooklm.google.com/notebook/5ec54d65-f512-4e6c-9c2a-db3f79281e99/audio https://notebooklm.google.com/notebook/5ec54d65-f512-4e6c-9c...
- steveBK123 1y agoThis sounds like an informercial
- jckahn 1y agoHow so? That sounds a completely realistic use of NotebookLM.
- steveBK123 1y agoJust the tone, I mean I listen to podcasts a bit but.. yuck. I'd rather just read than listen to this.
- jolan 1y agoI think he meant the audio output itself sounds like an infomercial. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfr4BP4V1R8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfr4BP4V1R8
- steveBK123 1y agoCorrect, yes. That NotebookLM podcast was like the most unpleasant way I can imagine to consume content. Reading transcripts of live talks is already pretty annoying because it's less concise than the written word. Having it re-expanded by robot-voice back to audio to be read to me just makes it even more unpleasant. Also sort of perverse we are going audio->transcript->fake audio. "YC has said the official video will take a few weeks to release," - I mean shouldn't one of the 100 AI startups solve this for them? Anyway, maybe it's just me.. I'm the kind of guy that got a cynical chuckle at the airport the other week when I saw a "magazine of audio books".
- jimmy76615 1y agoThe talk is still not available on YouTube? What takes them so long?
- no_wizard 1y agoA large contention of this essay (which I’m assuming the talk is based on or is transcribed from depending on order) I do think that open source models will eventually catch up to closed source ones, or at least be “good enough” and I also think you can already see how LLMs are augmenting knowledge work. I don’t think it’s the 4th wave of pioneering a new dawn of civilization but it’s clear LLMs will remain useful when applied correctly.
- umeshunni 1y ago> I do think that open source models will eventually catch up to closed source ones It felt like that was the direction for a while, but in the last year or so, the gap seems to have widened. I'm curious whether this is my perception or validated by some metric.
- msgodel 1y agoAlready today I can use aider with qwen3 for free but have to pay per token to use it with any of the commercial models. The flexibility is worth the lower performance.
- QRY 1y agoDo you have anything to share on that workflow? I've been trying to get a local-first AI thing going, could use your insights!
- msgodel 1y agoIt's super easy. I already had llama.cpp/llama-server set up for a bunch of other stuff and actually had my own homebrew RAG dialog engine, aider is just way better. One crazy thing is that since I keep all my PIM data in git in flat text I now have essentially "siri for Linux" too if I want it. It's a great example of what Karpathy was talking about where improvements in the ML model have consumed the older decision trees and coded integrations. I'd highly recommend /nothink in the system prompt. Qwen3 is not good at reasoning and tends to get stuck in loops until it fills up its context window. My current config is qwen2.5-coder-0.5b for my editor plugin and qwen3-8b for interactive chat and aider. I use nibble quants for everything. 0.5b is not enough for something like aider, 8b is too much for interactive editing. I'd also recommend shrinking the ring context in the neovim plugin if you use that since the default is 32k tokens which takes forever and generates a ton of heat.
- adamnemecek 1y agoAGI = approximating partition function. Everything else is just a poor substitute.
- pera 1y agoIs "Software 3.0" somehow related to "Web 3.0"?
- fhd2 1y agoPure coincidence, I'm sure :)
- pudiklubi 1y agoNo – for more context you can check out Karpathy's original essay from 2017: https://karpathy.medium.com/software-2-0-a64152b37c35 https://karpathy.medium.com/software-2-0-a64152b37c35
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y agoNo, they are totally unrelated. Web 3.0 is blockchain-backed web applications (rather than proprietary server-backed web applications, which is Web 2.0) and Software 3.0 is LLM-powered agents.
- uncircle 1y agoThey are related in that they are pure marketing buzzwords to build enormous hype around a product, if not a dream.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y agoThat does not describe Karpathy’s use of Software 3.0. He is referring to LLM agents with that term, which is agnostic to LLM model, whether third-party-hosted or self-hosted.
- knowaveragejoe 1y agoWhat was Software 2.0?
- jckahn 1y agoAnd what was Software 1.0?
- lvl155 1y agoI soak up everything Andrej has to say.
- koakuma-chan 1y agoAndrej is the Dan Abramov of AI.
- msgodel 1y agoThis is almost exactly what I've experienced with them. It's a great talk, I wish I could have seen it in person.
- afiodorov 1y ago> So, it was really fascinating that I had the menu gem basically demo working on my laptop in a few hours, and then it took me a week because I was trying to make it do it Reminds me of work where I spend more time figuring out how to run repos than actually modifying code. A lot of my work is focused on figuring out the development environment and deployment process - all with very locked down permissions. I do think LLMs are likely to change industry considerably, as LLM-guided rewrites are sometimes easier than adding a new feature or fixing a bug - especially if the rewrite is something into more LLM-friendly (i.e., a popular framework). Each rewrite makes the code further Claude-codeable or Cursor-codeable; ready to iterate even faster.
- andai 1y agoThe last 10% always takes 1000% of the time...
- afiodorov 1y agoI am not saying rewrites are always warranted, but I think LLMs change the cost-benefit balance considerably.
- steveklabnik 1y agoI am with you on this. I'm very much not sure about rewrites, but LLMs do change the cost-benefit balance of refactorings considerably, for me. Both in a "they let me make a more informed decision about proceeding with the refactoring" and "they are faster at doing it than I am".
- Aeolun 1y agoJup. Claude develops the first 90% without a sweat, and then starts flailing.
- alganet 1y ago> imagine changing it and programming the computer's life > imagine that the inputs for the car are on the bottom, and they're going through the software stack to produce the steering and acceleration > imagine inspecting them, and it's got an autonomy slider > imagine works as like this binary array of a different situation, of like what works and doesn't work -- Software 3.0 is imaginary. All in your head. I'm kidding, of course. He's hyping because he needs to. Let's imagine together: Imagine it can be proven to be safe. Imagine it being reliable. Imagine I can pre-train on my own cheap commodity hardware. Imagine no one using it for war.
- Henchman21 1y agoIf I’m going to be leaning on my imagination this much I am going to imagine a world where the tech industry considers at great length whether or not something should be built.
- alganet 1y agoLet me be clear about what I think: I have zero fear of an AI apocalypse. I think the fear is part of the scam. The danger I see is related to psychological effects caused by humans using LLMs on other humans. And I don't think that's a scenario anyone is giving much attention to, and it's not that bad (it's bad, but not world end bad). I totally think we should all build it. To be trained from scratch on cheap commodity hardware, so that a lot of people can _really_ learn it and quickly be literate on it. The only true way of democratizing it. If it's not that way, it's a scam.
- Henchman21 1y agoI think we fear the same things, roughly. My fear is what humans do with any tech we create. Where we differ is that I would prefer things not be built. After a lifetime of watching what we actually do with the things we create, I think we need a bit of a “time out”. Just my 2 cents that won’t change a thing!
- 1y ago
- kaladin-jasnah 1y agoTangentially related, but it boggles my mind this guy was badmephisto, who made a quite famous cubing tutorial website that I spent plenty of time on in my childhood.
- Frummy 1y agoTotally not a supervillain "Q: What does your name (badmephisto) mean? A: I've had this name for a really long time. I used to be a big fan of Diablo2, so when I had to create my email address username on hotmail, i decided to use Mephisto as my username. But of course Mephisto was already taken, so I tried Mephisto1, Mephisto2, all the way up to about 9, and all was taken. So then I thought... "hmmm, what kind of chracteristic does Mephisto posess?" Now keep in mind that this was about 10 years ago, and my English language dictionary composed of about 20 words. One of them was the word 'bad'. Since Mephisto (the brother of Diablo) was certainly pretty bad, I punched in badmephisto and that worked. Had I known more words it probably would have ended up being evilmephisto or something :p"
- bgwalter 1y ago> Since Mephisto (the brother of Diablo) Unbelievable. Perhaps some techies should read Goethe's Faust instead of Lord of the Rings.
- bluefirebrand 1y agoHe's talking about videogame characters If you want to scoff at anyone, scoff at 1990s Blizzard Entertainment for using those names in that way
- debugnik 1y agoTell that to the writers of Diablo. In the context of the game, those two characters are brothers.
- Aeroi 1y agoTL;DR: Karpathy says we’re in Software 3.0: big language models act like programmable building blocks where natural language is the new code. Don’t jump straight to fully autonomous “agents”—ship human-in-the-loop tools with an “autonomy slider,” tight generate-→verify loops, and clear GUIs. Cloud LLMs still win on cost, but on-device is coming. To future-proof, expose clean APIs and docs so these models (and coming agents) can safely read, write, and act inside your product.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- arkj 1y ago>Software 2.0 are the weights which program neural networks. >I think it's a fundamental change, is that neural networks became programmable with large libraries... And in my mind, it's worth giving it the designation of a Software 3.0. I think it's a bit early to change your mind here. We love your 2.0, let's wait for some more time till th e dust settles so we can see clearly and up the revision number. In fact I'm a bit confused about the number AK has in mind. Anyone else knows how he arrived at software 2.0? I remember a talk by professor Sussman where he suggest we don't know how to compute, yet[1]. I was thinking he meant this, Software 0.1 - Machine Code/Assembly Code Software 1.0 - HLLs with Compilers/Interpreters/Libraries Software 2.0 - Language comprehension with LLMs If we are calling weights 2.0 and NN with libraries as 3.0, then shouldn't we account for functional and oo programming in the numbering scheme? [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HB5TrK7A4pI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HB5TrK7A4pI
- autobodie 1y agoObjectivity is lacking throughout the entire talk, not only in the thesis. But objectivity isn't very good for building hype.
- bigyabai 1y agoReminds me of Vitalik Buterin. I spent a lot of my starry-eyed youth reading his blog, and was hopeful that he was applying the learned-lessons from the early days of Bitcoin. Turned out he was fighting the wrong war though, and today Ethereum gets less lip service than your average shitcoin. The whole industry went up in flames, really. Nerds are good at the sort of reassuring arithmetic that can make people confident in an idea or investment. But oftentimes that math misses the forest for the trees, and we're left betting the farm on a profoundly bad idea like Theranos or DogTV. Hey, I guess that's why it's called Venture Capital and not Recreation Investing.
- Karrot_Kream 1y agoI'm curious why you think that? I thought the talk was pretty grounded. There was a lot of skepticism of using LLMs unbounded to write software and an insistence on using ground truth free from LLM hallucination. The main thesis, to me, seemed like "we need to write software that was designed with human-centric APIs and UI patterns to now use an LLM layer in front and that'll be a lot of opportunity for software engineers to come." If anything it seemed like the middle ground between AI boosters and doomers.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- bcrosby95 1y agoI might be wrong, but it seems like some people are misinterpreting what is being said here. Software 3.0 isn't about using AI to write code. It's about using AI instead of code. So not Human -> AI -> Create Code -> Compile Code -> Code Runs -> The Magic Happens. Instead, it's Human -> AI -> The Magic Happens.
- finallyyes 1y ago[dead]
- __loam 1y agoThis industry is so tiring
- mattgreenrocks 1y agoDefinitely. And it gets more tiring the more experience you have, because you've seen countless hype cycles come and go with very little change. Each time, the same mantra is chanted: "but this time, it's different!" Except, it usually isn't. Started learning metal guitar seriously to forget about industry as a whole. Highly recommended!
- zie1ony 1y agoThis is great idea, until you have to build something.
- bmicraft 1y agoThe AI isn't much easier, when you consider the "AI" step is actually: create dataset -> train model -> fine-tune model -> run model to train a much smaller model -> ship much smaller model to end devices.
- bredren 1y agoAnyone know what "oil bank" was in the actual talk?
- romain_batlle 1y agoThe analogy with the grid seems pretty good. The fab one seems bad tho.
- mattlangston 1y agoVery nice find @pudiklubi. Thank you.
- uncircle 1y agoAI sus talk. Kinda appropriate.
- sammcgrail 1y agoYou’ve got “two bars” instead of “two rs” in strawberry
- computator 1y agoI was going to ask what this meant about strawberries: > LLMs make mistakes that basically no human will make, like, you know, it will insist that 9.11 is greater than 9.9, or that there are two bars of strawberry. These are some famous examples. But you answered it: It’s a stupid mistake a human makes when trying to mock the stupid mistakes that LLMs make!
- pudiklubi 1y agonice catch! the original transcript kept saying dogs instead of docs. thats the only thing i fixed (until your r's find now) after laughing at it for a while
- amelius 1y agoDoes it say anything about how this will affect wealth distribution?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- yusina 1y ago> I think broadly speaking, software has not changed much at such a fundamental level for 70 years. I love Andrej, but come on. Writing essentially punch cards 70 years ago, writing C 40 years ago and writing Go or Typescript or Haskell 10 years ago, these are all very different activities.
- TeMPOraL 1y agoNah, not much changed in the past 40-50 years; between the two, Lisp and Smalltalk spearheaded pretty much all the stuff that was added to other programming languages in subsequent decades, and some of the things yet to be added. The main thing that changed about programming is the social/political/bureaucratic side.
- 93po 1y agohow is it different? you're writing a series of instructions to execute, that's the same today as it was with punch cards. it's fundamentally the same even though we're doing this on 4k screens and with a million libraries behind it all
- jdougan 1y ago"broadly" does a lot of work in his statement. But as an old dude who has done these things, it isn't deeply different.
- yapyap 1y agoSUS talk great name already
- waynenilsen 1y agoI used https://app.readaloudto.me https://app.readaloudto.me to listen it is helpful
- gooseus 1y agoBut at what cost? And I don't mean the "human cost", I mean literally, how much will it cost to use an LLM as your "operating system"? Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't every useful LLM being operated at a loss?
- ath3nd 1y agoThat's part of the rug pull. They want to onboard as many people on their stuff and make them as dependent on it as possible, so the switching costs are more. It's the classic scam. Look at what Meta are doing now that they reached end of the line and are trying to squeeze out people for profitability: - Bringing Ads to WhatsApp: https://apnews.com/article/whatsapp-meta-advertising-messaging-92a7e3f34e019f7bcc37e2b81a1bc21e https://apnews.com/article/whatsapp-meta-advertising-messagi... - Desperately trying by any illegal means possible to steal your data: https://localmess.github.io/ https://localmess.github.io/ - Firing all the people who built their empire: https://www.thestreet.com/employment/meta-rewards-executives-after-firing-employees https://www.thestreet.com/employment/meta-rewards-executives... - Enabled ethnic cleansing in multiple instances: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/09/myanmar-facebooks-systems-promoted-violence-against-rohingya-meta-owes-reparations-new-report/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/09/myanmar-faceb... If you can't see the total moral bankruptcy of Big Tech, you gotta be blind. Don't Be Evil my ass. To me, LLMs have only one purpose: dumb down the population, make people doubt what's real and what's not, and enrich the tech overlords while our societies drown in the garbage they create.
- zkmon 1y agoI'm not an expert on the subject itself, but I can tell that the transcript, in its entirety, is missing a solid line. While the parts of this talk are great on their own, I feel they couldn't stitch the whole story together well. And probably he might not be confident of completeness and composition of his thought. What's the whole point? That should be answered in the first few minutes.
- sensanaty 1y agoChrist I'm gonna be forced to listen to the moronic managers and C-suites repeat this "software 3.0" bullshit incessantly from now on aren't I...
- throwawayoldie 1y agoThe good news is, it won't last forever. The bad news is, it's because some other drivel will take its place. Who wants to start a pool on when the first advertisement for "Software 3.0" goes up in an airport somewhere?
- snickell 1y agoIf you want to try what Karpathy is describing live today, here's a demo I wrote a few months ago: https://universal.oroborus.org/ https://universal.oroborus.org/ It takes mouse clicks, sends them to the LLM, and asks it to render static HTML+CSS of the output frame. HTML+CSS is basically a JPEG here, the original implementation WAS JPEG but diffusion models can't do accurate enough text yet. My conclusions from doing this project and interacting with the result were: if LLMs keep scaling in performance and cost, programming languages are going to fade away. The long-term future won't be LLMs writing code, it'll be LLMs doing direct computation.
- karpathy 1y agoBtw I notice many pretty bad errors in this transcription of the talk. The actual video will be up soon I hope.
- kapildev 1y agoHow soon? I am contemplating whether to read this errorful transcript or wait for the video
- dang 1y agoAh sorry! I'm going to downweight this thread now. There's so much demand around this, people are just super eager to get the information. I can understand why, because it was my favorite talk as well :)
- pudiklubi 1y agoanything you'd want fixed immediately? happy to do so – or even take this down if you wish. it's your talk.
- sotix 1y agoIs this because it was recorded with AI tooling rather than a traditional note taker?
- pudiklubi 1y agoit was an audio recording, transcribed with speech to text models. there's definitely some errors and words lost. I also tried to emphasize this
- sotix 1y agoThanks for the clarification. Bit ironic given the talk’s subject. It is quite a bit of effort, but there’s something to say for going through and manually writing up the transcript like a journalist. Sometimes you can’t beat human effort ;)
- 1y ago
- iLoveOncall 1y agoJust a grifter grifting. > The more reliance we have on these models, which already is, like, really dramatic Please point me to a single critical component anywhere that is built on LLMs. There's absolutely no reliance on models, and ChatGPT being down has absolutely no impact on anything beside teenagers not being able to cheat on their homeworks and LLM wrappers not being able to wrap.
- Aeolun 1y agoWell, you have all these social security programs using them to decide whether people should be investigated. That’s pretty nasty. I can totally see them not processing any applications if the model is down.
- ath3nd 1y agoI find it hard to care for the marginal improvements in a glorifiedutocomplete that guzzles a shit ton of water and electricity (all stuff that can be used for more useful stuff than generating a picture of a cat with human hands or some lazy rando's essay assignment) and then ends up having to be coddled by a real engineer into a working solution. Software 2.0? 3.0? Why stop there? Why not software 1911.1337? We went through crypto, NFTs, web3.0, now LLMs are hyped as if they are frigging AGI (spoiler, LLMs are not designed to be AGI, and even if they were, you sure as hell won't be the one to use them to your advantage, so why are you so irrationally happy about it?). Man this industry is so tiring! What is the most tiring is the dog-like enthusiasm of the people who buy it EVERY.DAMN.TYPE, as if it's gonna change the life of most of them for the better. Sure, some of these are worse and much more useless than others (NFTs), but in the core of all of it is this cult-like awe we as a society have towards figures like the Karpathy's, Musks and Altmans of this world. How are LLMs gonna help society? How are they gonna help people work, create and connect with one another? They take away the joy of making art, the joy of writing, of learning how to play a music instrument and sing, and now they are coming for software engineering. Sure, you might be 1%/2% faster, but are you happier, are you smarter (probably not: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/14/10/4115 https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/14/10/4115)?
- throwawayoldie 1y agoKARPATHY, MUSK, ALTMAN AND COMPANY: "How are we going to 'help society'? I'm sorry, I don't understand the question."
- jacobgorm 1y ago[flagged]
- 93po 1y agoif you had lidar in teslas they'd look like those massive silly things on top of waymos and they'd cost an extra $20k and literally no one would buy them. tesla has by far the best self driving software without lidar, they seem to be doing fine.
- jacobgorm 1y agoNot really doing fine https://www.yahoo.com/news/tesla-self-driving-cars-investigated-130718316.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAFRdBpOaJGXTs0kGiDeJgHSujkaVjPRWH_eID1U-vxFomR42Gk-HLaBmSyd6h-6CAkPXpm-AbdT1tn35CNfZOMhVOUoO3v4rN2gKnie72HsQZqtlzxVJqae5VvrQsmVddqwFVhuwmNPs8H5fEyieU3SKbc4EclG2EzMZBzTiR82P https://www.yahoo.com/news/tesla-self-driving-cars-investiga...
- dang 1y ago"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- meerab 1y agoCheck out the transcription of Andrej Karpathy's keynote at AI Startup School in San Francisco. https://videotobe.com/play/youtube/LCEmiRjPEtQ https://videotobe.com/play/youtube/LCEmiRjPEtQ
- 1970-01-01 1y agoIronic how the shiny new paradigm in software (AI) was not leveraged for cleaning up the transcription. We are not baking a new kind of pie, we're simply proving that you can bake with the microwave. We're not heading into a new "3.0" era. We're growing new branches to the trunk. AI will be mistaken for causing a paradigm shift in coding right until it fails to overtake the trunk and high quality code is necessary again.
- agentultra 1y agoBuzzword soup. A lot of mixed analogies and metaphors. Very little justification for anything. "We need to rewrite a lot of software," ok... why? "AI is the new electricity" Really now... so I should expect a bill every month that always increases and to have my access cut off intermittently when there's a rolling AI power outage? Interesting times indeed.