bpt3

31 ms·

661.
by bpt3 1y ago
> I do not recognize that. That is the point of my argument. And my point is that you're going to continue to be frustrated and disappointed by refusing to use the same terminology for a topic as everyone else. > A large portion
662.
by bpt3 1y ago
Google and the like aren't borrowing money to light on fire with their misguided attempts at new products, they're supplying it themselves from their highly profitable core business lines. Therefore their failure to produce retur
663.
by bpt3 1y ago
What is your definition of "independent economist"? Claiming that even a majority or plurality of economists overall agree with Piketty, who advocates for some wildly unpopular economic policies and is a literal socialist, is absu
664.
by bpt3 1y ago
Or you could recognize that "essential" has a meaning in economic/financial terms, but that would entirely deflate the ad hominem attack you launched to avoid acknowledging that the answer to his question is: "Not really
665.
by bpt3 1y ago
Junior devs are hired for potential, not current productivity. There's a reason they are mostly hired by very large organizations. How many junior devs does it take to produce the same amount of production code as a senior dev? And ho
666.
by bpt3 1y ago
It appears that you are jumping on posts by people who aren't an LLM advocate. My interest in debating a topic with someone who is anything approaching a zealot is near zero, but I will say this: Yes, junior developers exist. They gene
667.
by bpt3 1y ago
I have to assume you have absolutely no interest in being taken seriously by at least 99% of the US population, given that you are making statements like these regularly and they do not appear to be satire? I took the time to read a couple
668.
by bpt3 1y ago
I don't know who you're talking to, but the issue is increased volume of lines of code without any increase in quantity (or often, a decrease). That's the definition of "code slop" as I see it used, and you seem to
669.
by bpt3 1y ago
Except taxi drivers were not any safer, cleaner, more responsible, or more trustworthy than the general population, and the primary objective of most taxi companies seemed to be to actively screw with their customer base. In short, their cl
670.
by bpt3 1y ago
What's the point of that? A skilled developer can already develop high quality code at a normal speed? I will use AI for suggestions when using an API I'm not familiar with because it's faster than reading all the documentati
671.
by bpt3 1y ago
The contortions people will go through to defend a technology or concept they like blows my mind. Irrational exuberance is one thing, but denial of history in order to lower the bar for the next big thing really irritates me for some reason
672.
by bpt3 1y ago
Agreed. I think the parent poster meant it differently, but I think self driving cars are an excellent analogy. They've been "on the cusp" of widespread adoption for around 10 years now, but in reality they appear to have hit
673.
by bpt3 1y ago
It sounds like you can create and release high quality software with or without an agent. What would have happened if someone without your domain expertise wasn't reviewing every line and making the changes you mentioned? People aren&#
674.
by bpt3 1y ago
In this context, fewer security vulnerabilities exist in a real world vibe coded application (not a demo or some sort of toy app) than one created by a subject matter expert without LLM agents. I'd be willing to bet 6 figures that does
675.
by bpt3 1y ago
It's not bullshit. LLMs lower the bar for developers, and increase velocity. Increasing the quantity of something that is already an issue without automation involved will cause more issues. That's not moving the goalposts, it&#x2
676.
by bpt3 1y ago
You're talking about a theoretical problem in the future, while I assure you vibe coding and agent based coding is causing major issues today. Today, LLMs make development faster, not better. And I'd be willing to bet a lot of mon
677.
by bpt3 1y ago
Reporting from the conservative stronghold of the inner DC suburbs, kids are generally not allowed to wander unsupervised until they are in high school. In my experience, kids have very little unscheduled/unsupervised time in more libe
678.
by bpt3 1y ago
I agree that's the level of rational thought that has gone into this argument.
679.
by bpt3 1y ago
Is there a single argument in favor of this claim that is backed up in the references on this site? It doesn't look like it to me. The only secondary citation is on a website that is down and doesn't seem to be peer reviewed.
680.
by bpt3 1y ago
Yes, this is one of the most bizarre arguments I've seen in some time. Are Americans afraid of Canada or Greenland because it appears quite large on a Mercator map? Are we more likely to send aid to Asia because it is in fact a larger
681.
by bpt3 1y ago
Who is afraid of Russia based on the perceived size of Siberia?
682.
by bpt3 1y ago
It matters how? You think voters will increase support for Africa (whatever that means) if their perceived size of the continent is increased?
683.
by bpt3 1y ago
Not being able to buy a SFH isn't being priced out of a place to live. Home ownership is higher in the US than many other countries, and banning certain groups from participating in a sector will not increase supply.
684.
by bpt3 1y ago
Which is?
685.
by bpt3 1y ago
Your kind also tends to be driven more by emotional response and feelings than objective measurements.
686.
by bpt3 1y ago
Sure, it's possible in theory. The purpose of a LVT is to capture as much property value for the government as possible. Anyone advocating for it is unlikely to recommend exemptions that would interfere with that purpose.
687.
by bpt3 1y ago
> Improvements are not considered in a land value tax; it's kind of the point. The potential improvements to a parcel are a key factor in the land value, so they are relevant. > Land is also more fungible and easier to model the
688.
by bpt3 1y ago
I know, that's my point. Increasingly (from my limited view), people with a progressive viewpoint seem to be making this claim ("account X never participated in good faith and therefore should be banned") without any real gro
689.
by bpt3 1y ago
> Absolutely valid to say that "best and highest use" is vague and untrustworthy at best, but it's said this way to avoid getting trapped in the weeds of what exactly it means. I want the government to be "trapped in
690.
by bpt3 1y ago
"Your kind" are the type of people who use terms like "turbo greed" and expect to have their opinions taken seriously. It's not a coincidence that there's a huge overlap between people who use terms like "

More ›