a2ff6eeb0

9 ms·

241.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
Exactly, that's what I'm saying. Humans aren't needed, and we can drop them from the economy. Hopefully after we figure out some sort of utopia, but probably not -- so I'm doing what I can to avoid the permanent undercla
242.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
Would you hire a SW engineer that only showcases output from compilers, and can't explain the assembly that it wrote? Since even the engineers that know what's going on aren't actually reading all of the AI output any more (o
243.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
The code is so cheap today that you can just ask an LLM to generate it for you, for all but the largest projects. I don't get why you'd care about humans being involved, no.
244.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
I don't understand why people are so fixated on the minds doing the mathematics being made out of meat. It seems obvious that soon, minds made of meat aren't going to be able to keep up. Useful thought, rather than hobbyist though
245.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
They landed half a decade ago...
246.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
But Makita isn't selling machines that can decide how to build the house, and then go do it. AI tools are a mind and mechanism. They're a full replacement for the human, especially in the software space. I think we're genui
247.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
What's wrong with sitting on the beach with a bottle of wine for eternity, with no need to do anything, knowing that all your needs and desires will be automatically taken care of? I don't think you can be coherently pro-AI withou
248.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
Well, that's why we have automated proof checking. And again, I don't think humans will be able to solve problems at a commercial scale in the future. Maybe we'll have some hobbyist dabblers, but any real progress will be don
249.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
I think it's impossible to be half in. AI will eventually be better at things than people, and people will simply be rocks in the gears of progress. The only thing to do is to be all in, or get run over.
250.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
I don't know why anyone should care about understanding the results if the AI is better at math than us. It'd be like demanding that human mathematicians are banned from publishing until their cats understand the theorems. If Amaz
251.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
Ok, sure. Hobbyist purposes excluded.
252.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
As I said elsewhere: The future of tools like github is a platform for manual testing, where you write a prompt, the AI proposes a change and you can experiment with the UI and attach notes for the next iteration. AI can take user requests,
253.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
Exactly; being replaced is inevitable, the machines are going to end up more intelligent than us. At some point in the near to moderate future, selling the output of your brain is no longer going to be economically viable. I hope we'll
254.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
I mean, I get it; they've got a dying business model, and unless you're paying per commit, you're not a customer, you're a cost center.
255.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
Well, yes -- obviously; it takes a huge amount of training data and generates new projects. I guess you could argue that it's not just for new projects -- it's used for old projects too?
256.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
We're seeing the death of people writing code. There's no reason for a human to care about what the computer executes, as long as it does the right thing, so why would anyone care about reviewing the code? Coding is turning into b
257.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
Why would you ever care about looking at code? Code forges aren't really a useful tool going forward. As agents replace people writing code, the features of code forges really aren't that useful. Nobody will be reviewing agent cod
258.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
Yeah, it's incredible how we turned something that used to need talent into something you can just pay a big model provider for and have it done for you. Programming is now easy for anyone to do, no skill needed.
259.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
Not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but it's always been puzzling to me why American tech wages were so high.
260.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
Because we're actively exploring the best way to remove any need to deal with code, and make it so that you don't need any real talent to make a computer do things for anyone. We haven't quite hit on the right formula yet, bu
261.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
If AI fulfills its promise and we get superintelligence, humans will not be capable of contributing anything of economic value via thought, possibly outside of small, comstrained niches. You may as well try to outlift a crane. Either this w
262.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
Why not? LLMs also only care about lines of text.
263.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
Yeah, and the rest are probably not quite so invested.
264.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
But I just want stable hosting for my shit. I barely even interact with the web UI, other than commenting on PRs.
265.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
You can say that, but check how many people are going to the gym regularly, let alone training up to the standard of strength of an average manual laborer from before the industrial revolution. If AI fills its promise, some people will be t
266.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
For now, it's less sad than working retail.
267.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
Yeah, every time they change my laptop's mainboard, they definitely do it with a ton of time.
268.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
Did they? From what I heard, transformer models gave scientists better starting points for computational methods, but we're still far from solving the protein folding problem.
269.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
Fabs take multiple years to spin up, so expect it to last probably 3 to 5 years.
270.
by a2ff6eeb0 2mo ago
You also have to answer why, if the AI project pans out, we would care about education. We have mechanical muscles, and the human strength that was needed before the industrial revolution is no longer important; weight lifters still strengt

More ›