> I asked a model to evaluate your comment history and it found loads of patterns such as
> “I’m not sure…” / “I don’t…” hedges before disagreement Negation followed by correction/reframing is a recurring structure: essentially “It’s not X, it’s Y”.
I did a manual human dig through GP's profile and I don't see any evidence supporting this. The literal strings "I'm not sure" and "I don't" do appear a lot, and they are used to hedge before making a statement, but not a single one of them even approaches the "It's not X, it's Y" thing your LLM has claimed they do. Your LLM did not find dozens of examples.
With the "intelligence" of code focused and capable llm in the last six months, the main problem I'm seeing now is problems where some total amateur who has no previous knowledge of coding tries to one shot a project. People who have previous experience and know how to architect things (and when to stop an LLM from doing something wrong that will cause maintenance and scale and extensibility problems in the future) are doing much better building actually useful things.
Had a lot of the content in this article came out 4 years ago I would have agreed. At least we finally don't have a fake Image Coding Comparisons [1] that tries to undermine JXL.
Ignoring AOM and AV1, I was the first few on HN apart from its author supporting JXL from the start, I would argue the biggest case against JPEG XL is JPEG li.
Jpegli offer enough quality improvement and advantage without introducing an entirely new codec. And all of a sudden the bar for next image codec now needs to be even higher.
I, and I think most experienced developers, can recognize the type of code that incurs a maintenance cost down the line; that will make adding new code take longer. And AI writes such code "relatively" frequently. I love having the AI to write code, but I find it extremely important to review it - to make sure that it's correct, understandable, and not going to be a problem later.
You can claim ownership via restricted channels, e.g. a phone call to key politicians, and rely on their self-interest to keep things quiet while understanding the threat.
In some cases, if the action is a bit too effective, you might even want to avoid it being pinned on you. Al Qaeda occasionally refused to claim ownership of things they very plainly did, and the Russians do it very often (e.g. when they shot down a Dutch passenger plane a few years ago).
When it began to dawn on them that their political "side" was intentionally ignoring climate change to boost fossil fuel profiteers they fell back to mocking hippies and silly women environmentalist for supporting feel good renewables instead of manly nuclear.
It made them feel much better, so now they need to desperately avoid learning anything about either renewables or nuclear power because their ego will collapse if confronted with reality.
YouTube contains lessons from the most prestigious universities; divulgational material from "all" countries and times; intellectual commentaries about the past hours from most prestigious academicians; video documents of paramount importance.
All of this updated daily.
I receive daily RSS from hundreds of channels and I know very well what we can find in it.
That it is surely of course also full of trash is not an argument - also bookstores and libraries will be.
People in formation and in cultivation are mandated attendance - the opposite of avoiding it.
What threw me off was the (possibly misunderstood) suggestion for minimizing the generalization bound over the prior after the data has been incorporated.
So is architecting, testing, validating, and even occasionally using.
This isn't the first time I've seen this phrase recently, but I'm not sure what the thought is a cliche or what it is intended to convey (don't read my note as negative, I sincerely am unsure what connotation folks are trying to say).
So, in real life, steal, raise attack dogs and blackmail and tell me, are you going to be praised by society ?
Openai and Anthropic just behave like criminals. First they orchestrate the IP theft of the millennia, then they train the equivalent of attack pitbull and let one loose and finally they blackmail to achieve monopoly through regulation or else they'll unleash the dogs ...
We don't have a problem of missing regulation, we have a problem of actually applying existing law enforcement and make both Altman and Amodei accountable for their actions.
The NOS is not the most unbiased news source in the Netherlands which is unfortunate. If it is indeed 'radical farm leaders' who are behind these sabotage actions they have turned up the temperature quite a bit and stand to lose a lot of support from the public. It would be a strange thing to do since there is not much overlap between farming and railways in the Netherlands, a small country with a strong agricultural sector which' products mostly travel by road, water and air.
3. The business cannot figure out a direction so the developer can either churn on design docs fruitlessly or make prototypes that visually show the business people what our options are in order for them to make up their minds
This is certainly interesting idea, but I guess main problem isnt just UX and representation on 2D surface, but just pure amount of text data that you suppose to look at and understand what exactly it does.
When you have fiction or game dialogue text there is good bunch skimming going on so you dont care about every single symbol and or digit. So eyes dont get stuck looking at specific parts of text.
So yeah its very much possible that using VR as a virtual monitor setup it's just wrong aproach and there have to be paradigm shift in how we interact with dev environment to use it efficiently in VR.
Its very different living in the late 80s to early 90s coming up with cool ideas that push affordable hardware to their limits just like John Carmack did with games like Keen, Wolf3d, Doom and Quake.
It was at an era where someone good at their craft can get the recognition they deserve. However, while some things he managed to figure out himself.. other things were ideas from others. He simply tried it and reviewed the results!
Looking in the games industry today - an 'individual' is not going to get the same recognition like John Carmack back in the day (or Ken Silverman, etc)
This industry is LARGE. Any god-like programmer trying things within a large corporation is not likely to get noticed today as they hide away in the background pushing an in-house games engine forward. I am sure there are a fair number of John Carmacks out there. Invisible... nameless legends pushing things, etc.
As for indie companies - why risk trying to be a 2026 version of John Carmack when Godot, Unreal, etc, exists. Its a different world today!
Same thing for AI. I bet there have been some legendary programmers working on AI in the last 10 years. Again, nameless individuals behind the brand.
If any names are mentioned... its likely CEO's or other higher ups... not the talent underneath. I guess thats good business strategy and works [for the business].
Focusing on John Carmack - I am not taking anything away from him. He is a legend. I am sure he contributed towards VR before and after Meta purchase. With AI.. I guess we will see.
At the end of the day the guy could walk away and focus on hobbies. Still has a lot of batteries left. More power to him.
If you think AI is going to destroy the world (I don't, by the way), then how does making it open source stop that?
I truly don't understand. It's like saying "we can neutralize this doomsday device by making it easy for everyone to build one of their own."