Haha. Yes, it’s important to get some basics down. Get a small amount of stuff from the store and be able to do many things with it.

The fancy recipes are great and all, but you end up with some items in the pantry you may never use again.

Eh, consciousness is just an elaborate Markov Chain on life that didn’t go the botany route hundreds of millions years ago.

Intelligence is just a word we came up with very recently to try explain stuff.

LLMs are literally just us hearing ourselves for once.

Straight to business

I assume that’s the American version of right-wing and not actual right-wing.

I kinda expected within the month.

Then immediately flies to Argentina…

I think people assume the AI code goes first, but it’s not really like that.

I just busted out a half day of coding. Really impressive stuff for my standard and was just in flow with little optimisation breakthroughs popping in my head as I made it through. Output looks great, all working as expected, documented and commented my new things in case I forget them later or want to explain them to the team.

But later, I’ll probably run it through a model real quick and expect at least one change, usually around tidying things up or an opportunity to optimise a block here or there a bit more. Basically tighten up any loose screws or be pointed to big obvious things I somehow missed.

Really, I think that’s how most devs are making use of it. It can be frightening the shit LLMs come up with starting for scratch (that goes with anything), or even 60-70%. Doesn’t matter how good the prompts are, at the end of the day, it’s relying on Frankencode sourced from all over the place to apply solutions. It has no consistent and familiar, style, logic, or “accent” in its language. But if it’s got an established and detailed base, concept, and direction (such as a mostly completed chunk of code), frequently enough it’ll assist well with finding dumb shit.

It’s like a final phase thing, to get you beyond, “It seems work work well; good enough.” to “It’s definitely working well. This is done for now.”

I like to think that’s what’s going on here because anyone with even moderate developing knowledge/skill/experience totally sees just how bad LLMs are at coding.

Why?

Probably most of Truth is on Twitter

No matter how hard things get, they’re actually easy and in no way threaten the ability to survive. The hardest thing in your life is just the current record for how good you are at getting through things. Life’s challenges are opportunities to exercise your resilience. Bad times are something to look forward to because you get to see what’s achievable when you operate at 100%.

This and the news about Reddit stock?

What great news to wake up to. Today’s gonna be good.

Yep. Black numbers mean your money is disappearing, red means you’re making it near light speed. The - before the number means you’re subtracting funds from the other suckers.

Atheism is just an ideological position on deities., so you can be one and still have a religion. The article specifically notes his religion as Humanism, but he could be Buddhist, Taoist, any philosophical religion. I dunno if pantheism or Satanism would count, but don’t see why not; they’re both a hoot with very positive values.

Probably. It’s a US company so it’ll always fail with minimal consequences, as compared to a state service or country with regulation.

It’s a case of when and how often.

Yes.

You’d be naive of history to say otherwise.

Marx formalised an industrial era ideology from many existing concepts, evolving it further politically and economically to reapply those concepts to, what were then, modern times with rapidly expanding globalisation.

He was no Jesus, but he did preach the gospel.

Yeah, we’re gonna need some facts for those capitalist claims, bud.

If it were a long-term medical solution

It’s his examples that I’m going off. But maybe he doesn’t know what he’s talking about and an IBM engineer is losing their shit at upper management right now. I used to work for them a long time ago under Virginia and that was standard… Though, so has been every other place since.

I give IBM credit because so many of the people there are ridiculously smart. Not their business people.

“It’s a simple question for any enterprise. Would you like something that’s 10 percent of the cost if it’s 90 percent as good as the best, or do you want to pay that 10 times higher cost?”

That really depends…

90% is disasterous. It may sound good because it’s “just” 10% off 100%, but it’s awful. Two iterations reduces that to ~0.01%< but that’s still pretty bad. Obviously the more complex, the higher the risk and the more demand and time per iteration. The machine also has no concept of criticality, so how much is being saved with three or even four iterations to assure failure is basically zero?

“Then the question is: how many tasks require that? I would tell you some do, but the vast majority, summarizing an email, examining a contract, answering a customer call, composing an email, all of those can be done as well with the much cheaper answer.”

Imagine 10,000 emails an hour through your enterprise and 1,000 times It fucks up. Anything from missing info to misinterpreting to just straight up modifying/deleting. No concept of criticality per email. 8,000 in a 9–5 office. 24,000 a day for a global enterprise. That’s what 90% looks like.

Then you got “examining contracts” and all the other stuff he mentioned…

Die sollten einfach dahin ziehen…

Just a hunch that vibe coders don’t have the patience to learn the fundamentals of how their project is actually working, let alone understand methods for fixing the back end or be good enough at using an LLM to try get it to do it well.

Some people would use vibe coding to learn, but “laziness” is a far common occurring adjective with vibe and coded projects require a lot of patience and knowing what’s going on.

Oh, my… 100% vibe coded is excluded?!

So basically, even if it’s okay on release, it’ll never receive an update or bug fixes, because the “dev” literally has no idea what’s actually going on.