AntwaneB

Author here, you're right, but by definition when you do all of this the Bus Factor has already increased:

> This assumes your adding documentation, tests, instructions, and other scaffolding along the way, of course.

It's not just about knowledge in someone's brain, just about knowledge persistence.

Hello, author here. Thanks for your comment.

I agree with your first point, maybe AI will close some of those gaps with future advances, but I think a large part of the damage will have been done by then.

Regarding the memory of reasoning from LLMs, I think the issue is that even if you can solve it in the future, you already have code for which you've lost the artifacts associated with the original generation. Overall I find there's a lot of talks (especially in the mainstream media) about AI "always learning" when they don't actually learn new anything until a new model is released.

> Why does it require 100% accuracy 100% of the time? Humans are not 100% accurate 100% of the time and we seem to trust them with our code.

Correct, but humans writing code don't lead to a Bus Factor of 0, so it's easier to go back, understand what is wrong and address it.

If the other gaps mentioned above are addressed, then I agree that this also partially goes away.

And did you count the times it did NOT happen? How many times have you talked about a subject, and then no ad related to that subject appeared?

You're noticing the exception to the rule, not the rule.

I don't believe it for a second.

After reading the post, I fail to see any connection between 9/11 and the fact that mass surveillance is not the way forward.

The article is also empty of any reason WHY mass surveillance would not be the way forward, or even why it should not be.

This is a particularly useless article.

Mumble has been around for more than 15 years, if they were going to improve on those it would have already been done.