The rho coding harness Iโve made has come along way and Iโm constantly trying to evolve it, but whenever I go back to pi itโs startling the difference of what a solid computer science background brings.
For sure. We're well past the point of being able to reasonably claim that the tools have no practical use.
But I share the article's skepticism that LLM-based AI will "produce a fully automated drop-in replacement for most knowledge workers". Which it at this point has to in order to justify these companies' stupendous valuations.
Tomorrow no but there will always be the โhopeโ which is enough for the next 20 years before giving up. Which meanwhile would be replacing larger and larger chunks of the workforce so it wonโt really matter, weโll be adjusting our lives around it as well so we meet in the middle.
Tesla has been overvalued for over a decade with the promise of โfully autonomous carsโ and itโs still not losing its value, despite not meeting that (and probably never will, as the computation necessary to achieve it is bounded by physics).
That's a different situation. Tesla's a public company whose valuation is driven by the market, which has the right to be irrational. My understanding is that the AI buildout is financed such that the companies need to turn a profit by ~2030 or else they drown in capital costs.
Or maybe the frontier labs become Tesla-like, if it turns out investors just want to believe in the dream and don't care about financials that don't make economic sense. I just don't see that happening, given current sentiment and the overwhelming unpopularity of AI in the West.
Sick makes me calm. My mind goes quiet for some time. I can sit and look at the horizon. Or just contemplate the different shades of white of my ceiling while laying on my bed. I miss the silence of my youth.
I finished Rejection by Tony Tulathimutte and now I'm struggling to take any other book seriously. I need a pallet cleanser or something before I can move on
Vagyis attรณl mรฉg, hogy trehรกny vagyok, mรฉg mลฑkรถdhetne jobban is az anyagmegmaradรกs tรถrvรฉnye, mint รฉppen errefelรฉ, vagyis errefelรฉ plรกne mลฑkรถdnie kellene, mรฉgsem ezt teszi.
So even though I'm clumsy, the law of conservation of matter could still work better than it does here, or rather, it shouldn't work here, but it doesn't.
In the first attempt, Opus 4.7 successfully completed it and proved it. However, the solution is to enumerate all possible space and .filter out anything that doesn't qualify my definition, which is obviously not ideal (if cheating is too harsh).
I can't think of a good way to also prevent that kind of solutions and ended up prompting "please don't enumerate and filter". Opus 4.7 then reimplemented and proved the backtracking algorithm.
Economist Lant Pritchett describes shifts in ideas as silly, controversial, progressive, then obvious.
Also:
"Radio has no future. X-rays are clearly a hoax. The aeroplane is scientifically impossible." - Lord Kelvin
". No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." - CmdrTaco
@fastidiousprofilefollow"Beware those that would deny you access to information, for in their heart they dream themselves your master." โ Sid Meyerswrote:
Makes sense to me, though I think one important (IMO) aspect of this evolutionary role is incurring liabilities. Yes, software can be created by a wider audience, but when things go awry, would they have the aptitude or contingencies in place to recover and take responsibility?
Maintenance of software/systems was a mere after thought in my experience. Adding new things made careers, bonuses etc. so there was no real incentives for maintenance. The article argues that LLMs will do it. I'll believe if and when I see it.