TheGRS

Yep, actively suppressing renewable efforts all the way down to shaming on a cultural level. It should be a net positive for Americans to adopt renewables - cheaper energy, more independence, good for the environment - but instead its viewed as silly or too unreliable when it isn't.

I think the lack of concentration in some areas, particularly hubs in Texas and Florida, is actually pretty eye-opening. To me these areas should be very dense with panels from the cost/benefit alone.

My initial thought was that was a weird choice in this article, but I wouldn't fault someone for being thorough.

Probably a better choice as an appendix, move the good stuff up to the top. But overall its NBD.

One is one. Two is a coincidence. And three is a trend. That's my personal head canon.

You know, I mention this stuff all the time in various meetings and discussions. I read a lot of stuff on Hacker News and just have years of accumulated knowledge from the various colleagues I've worked with. Its nice to have a little reference sheet.

Our visits to Uniqlo would say differently!

I'm kind of surprised that C-suite folks fall for this marketing ploy when many of them are typically very close to the sales process in very high stakes areas. I guess it just shows you that anyone is susceptible to a well done grift. On second thought I'm thinking back through the history of C-suite decisions I've seen first and second hand and I'm not surprised at all.

IIRC Uber employees would jump into taxis and offer them money on the spot to drive for them.

Its priming the pump, I agree there's probably no way around it. Once you get some adoption you can use that experience to go to other cities. Hit social networks often to generate interest organically.

I mean more like, I'd look for the stuff that's like $300-$400 in the US at various places that would sell it in Japan and generally speaking it was more expensive in the stores in Japan after conversion. I was expecting it'd be like similar price or less. So I opted to just buy the imports in the US.

My take at this point is that everything is still too fresh to really settle on some new paradigm for working. Yegge is clearly very passionate about this, and that's what got me to try his book. I just don't think he can really articulate some strategy to it yet.

To answer your question, no. I'm growing deeply suspicious of outright vibe coding as a practice. We still need to figure out the tools and process, so experimentation is pretty much where we're still at.

If you've been to Japan any time recently you'd probably know that just about everything is cheaper in Japan, especially food and drink. I've been twice, most recently back in October, and I'm blown away by how relatively affordable things are. USD goes a long long way in Japan.

Oddly I could not find any cheaply priced Japanese Whiskey, and I looked around quite a bit. It was all about as much or more than what I could get it for in the states.

I just had to post this somewhere in this thread, but I bought his Vibe Coding book after listening to him talk through it. I figured it would help me understand his approach and therefore help me get into the same mindset for vibe coding on a serious level. It was garbage. The book is largely written and edited by LLMs and it shows on every page. It was a slop how-to book without many useful gems on how to go about vibe coding outside of "just do it".

One explanation is that some think we might be getting to the limits of what an LLM can reasonably do. There's a lot of functions of any job that are not easily translated to an LLM and are much more about interacting with people or critical thinking in a way LLMs can't do. I'm not sure if that's everyone's rationale but that's my personal view of the situation. Like the jobs will change but we likely won't be losing them to AI outright.

Its always been a momentum thing for me, grew up on Windows, esp in my LAN party days. The guys running linux couldn't play 90% of the games the rest of us were. When dev became more important to me I would typically reach for something else because the windows dev experience always kind of sucked IMO (unless you were a .NET person, which for the most part I was not).

I have a spare laptop with Pop OS on it now and I'm really enjoying it. Kind of forget I'm on it sometimes. I'm considering putting it as my OS for my main powerful laptop that I play most of my games on.

The points brought up are all great. I'm in a lower management position and I've wondered for a decade why the budget, cost, and return on work (i.e. revenue) were never divulged or connected to the work at hand. So kudos for facing that problem bluntly in language that's easy to follow. The place I'm at currently, its much more about automating away processes and making back office operations easier, so there's likely a lot of direct cost savings that we could measure, but don't.

Here's the problem I see with how this particular article is moving though: the context of these projects are often highly technical connecting back to the human problem space. Developers sit on the technical end but they also usually have a mental model for how it connects back to the non-technical. A product manager is another addition to compensate for the user connection. Between all of these folks they can only hold so much in their head about the problem space on a day-to-day basis. And that headspace for the problem is what is critical. Management wants to try a new idea for sales? They need to take it to the team with that problem space to translate it into working code. Even with the assistance of agents, one needs to hold the important patterns in their head. And my company certainly isn't going to vibe code its way through anything regulatory, mistakes there might cost us a ton in fees and bad PR. Hell I've seen product managers sweat over the possibility of getting a few 1 star reviews on the app store.

Anyway, you still need people with context to break things down and get them out the door, the agents can just assist with the speed of the In Progress stage. And clever teams can figure out how to automate their validation (but they could already do that).

Rockstar developers often seem to be the ones who can parachute in, gain context, make changes, and leave to find another problem space. They get bogged down when they've visited 10 or more problem spaces and then they start getting called back into service. Again the agents don't change any of that, the human involved has a finite capacity for context.

Teams who structure around maintaining context might be best suited for the new world of code.

Did Iran as a country participate in the global economy outside of trading their commodities? Commodity trading existed well before the global economy and was often a cause for wars. I was under the impression Iran was fairly shut down from the rest of the world economically and culturally.

How'd you get that from what I wrote? I literally said the problem is that the wealth created was not redistributed. The issue is that the masses suffer and elect people who are ill-suited to solve their problems.

Globalization offered the model for this. When the economy is globally linked there is more pressure for stability than conflict. I think that theory still holds. The fallout of the last 10 years is that the distribution of the wealth created in that system has not been even at all, and we are seeing huge wealth gaps. Jobs were redistributed to poorer nations and lost in a lot of wealthier markets.

If nations can solve wealth and job distribution under globalization then I think we return back to peaceful times. The current problems stem from people getting left out and then voting in leaders who do not understand diplomacy or the global market at all.

You might be right, but that's an awfully risky bet for such a new company in a tight race with their competitors. I'm sure a modestly staffed support team could get to these requests, especially if they put some AI resources into helping.

That was a very interesting read. I appreciate when anyone tries to dig into the actual why of culture instead of just leaving it at face value. I get the impression this is more of a working theory than factual on the sociological side, because I do think there's a lot of counter-arguments to be made about strong kinship networks that are otherwise wealthy and prosperous.

And there's a pretty obvious parallel in wealthy nations: the lavish wedding. There are many examples of otherwise modest to low income couples, even with support of their families, putting on weddings they can't really afford but they do it anyway because of social mores. Maybe there's a clear connection between those examples and strong kinship networks. Or maybe its back to peer pressure and keeping up with the joneses.

In all seriousness, shouldn't Anthropic be heavily dogfooding this sort of use case? I'm also not a huge fan of Amazon's support system, but they at least seem to be using their AI tools a lot for support responses (which has its own issues, but credit where its due).

Every conference talk on this stuff seems to suggest that we're all way behind the curve on AI implementation, but I suspect its mostly smoke and mirrors and mechanical turks. My company invests heavily in automated IVR and chat responses and we still optimize for getting the customer to a real agent. Those agents are largely overseas BPOs, but at least that's better than an AI loop that gets you nowhere.

I'm also disappointed by the decision, but I get the argument made from the business perspective. I'm required to dispose my waste properly and its reflected in my prices, my competitor is not doing these practices and they should be compelled to follow the same regulations. I'm just disappointed that their court sided with the business since a better resolution would've been "your company can do this too if you just do the legwork".

They also mentioned that invasive grass species were suppressed by the orange peels which likely contributed to native plants thriving better.

The joke is that all of the engineers that came before AI were also just following established patterns, right down to everyone wearing the same outfit to work despite our tech workplaces usually being very business casual. Implication that taste was not something these engineers had either.

Looks neat, kind of an early stage of what you're building? I see a lot of room for features to make goldfishing do-able.

A past company I worked for made SaaS and On-prem and we supported Oracle with the on-prem. The simple act of supporting and testing that option was enormous for our company, but the customers we had that needed it were highly lucrative.

Totally agreed looking at them from a development and cutting-edge viewpoint. They own what was once very competitive platforms and languages, which they still support. They have largely transitioned into rent seekers.

From the investment standpoint they still have a lot of value to siphon from, but its all rent seeking behavior, its not producing new ecosystems like them or Sun did in the past. Long-term blue chip play.

Though all the Paramount stuff is loosely coupled to them now, so tough to say if its a good long-term play anymore.

Boards aren't exactly dummies either. If they can see their exec isn't necessary I think they'd make moves to eliminate the positions. But that's in a world where reality meets the hype, and I don't think we're there yet. It gets weirder to think that then anyone with access to the tools and some capital could reasonably make their own company to battle it out with the big guys, but that future is a lot hazier.

Validation efforts likely become more necessary, so costs rise in another area. And product managers find they still need someone to translate the requirements well because LLMs are too agreeable. Cost optimization still needs someone to intervene as well.

I know there's an attempt to shift the development part from developers to other laypeople, but I think that's just going to frustrate everyone involved and probably settle back down into technical roles again. Well paid? Unclear.

Gone only because current leadership kicked them all to the curb and told them to get out of Washington. Only loyal talking heads are wanted there now.