Nah, he’s just a capitalist highlighting the contradictions. Capitalism doesn’t mean “you get to own stuff”, on the contrary it means that property is increasingly concentrated in the hands of the few because of exponential accumulation.
In other words, he is right that centralizing computation is more efficient in the physical sense. But under capitalism it’s also a means to further take away control from the working class and rent-seek us to hell.
Even though framework is questionable as a company, I really like their quip of “Seize the means of computation”. I know it’s just a way to sell more hardware but this news got me thinking about other ways to interpret it.
I also write less and less code for my job nowadays, increasingly just sketching out the architecture and most important/unique code paths, letting the LLM fill in the boring details, and cleaning up the idiotic things it hallucinates sometimes.
However,
Nobody in my team writes code anymore. Things that would have taken days are now done in minutes. We are all just considering design and architecture. We are changing our processes since they are not fit for the new way of doing things. Scrum? What’s even the point anymore? We can work through a sprint-backlog that would’ve taken two weeks in two days now. We do reviews 90% of the time. When we request changes they come back in minutes.
That… kinda sounds good? I mean, we have extracted the boring repetitive boilerplate and can focus on actually getting things done. LLMs can expand your thoughts into code that you would have written much faster than you can. You still know how to write that code (well, you should anyway) so I don’t see much of an issue there.
If you liked doing the parts that are no longer necessary, there’s plenty of FOSS software you can contribute to, or just start your own pet project! In those situations there is no financial incentive to replace your typing skills with a token predictor, you can write everything by yourself, and it helps keep your skills fresh in order to not miss hallucinations or bugs.
LLMs come with a lot of ethical issues but they can also be an awesome tool to make your job more interesting. It just depends on what you like doing and from which perspective you look at it.
We actually have a big shortage of talent
That review may lead to changes in roles, responsibilities, and continued employment. Individual outcomes will be communicated directly once decisions are finalized.
Knowing how the hiring/onboarding process works in IT — i.e. how fucking hard it is to find, hire, onboard, train and build up a working relationship with an adequate employee — I strongly doubt they have a “shortage of talent” if they’re willing to fire (or even just threaten to fire) people over what amounts to tooling use.
Oh, also, if I got an email threatening my “continued employment” over shit like this I’d be looking for a new job ASAP. And I have been using LLMs for my work for a couple of years now.
Soooo happy that I invested the time and effort into self-hosting my own email server.
Until dovecot and/or postifx enshittify, that is.
I agree that in general some margin on labor can be expected to recoup capex. But ~70% is just too much, especially for the original example of a “cleaning fee” on top of the “everything else” charge that you already have to pay.
There is no “this goes to keep the lights on” surcharge
Actually when I still had a car and took it to my favourite shop, the itemized bill included parts, labor, and a “workshop charge” to pay their rent and stuff. Speaking to the mechanics they did actually get all the money in the “labor” item (minus payroll taxes). I liked that approach.
If the shop gives me a bill with a $75 “labor” item, but actually pays the mechanics $25, I’d also have a big problem with that
It will definitely be profitable for the hardware makers. Companies whose entire value proposition depends on the model weights not leaking in an increasingly sloppy vulnerability-filled world of IT? Not so much.
Online voting is a bad idea, generally speaking. Computers are much less “transparent” to humans compared to other humans counting papers, so it’s much easier for the operator to rig. This is even ignoring the fact that it’s very difficult to set up a network-connected computer system that doesn’t have at least some vulnerabilities…
Home ownership is a lot higher in currenntly existing socialist states than in their capitalist peers. Do what you will with that information.
I agree with your overall point, still I think there needs to be some context.
Here is the graph for USSR’s prison population (I could only find it in russian on yandex, because search engines are so fucked up nowadays):
USSR really did have a relatively high imprisonment rate throughout its existence, and I think its punishment-focused penitentiary system was one of its worst sides. I’m glad that other socialist states are improving theirs, and I hope one day they can reach a point where prisons in their current form would no longer be necessary.
As an aside, I find it really interesting that there was a simultaneous increase in prison population in both USSR and the US in the 80s:
While in the US it was mainly caused by “law and order” politics popularized after the revolutionary movements of the 70s, combined with privatization of prison labor, I couldn’t find any well-sourced explanations for why it happened in USSR.
There are currently other problems with AI but they are much easier to solve when those profiting from them don’t own the government. See: China’s regulation on AI chatbots
This should be the text on join-lemmy.org