amoss

I personally love the appearance of the tl;dr about a third of the way through, that is some S tier trolling.

Remarkably it has only cost a few trillion dollars to get here!

Reasonable hypothesis. Supported by data. Seems legit

Nobody wants to admit that we are living through this: https://xkcd.com/1319/

But at scale. Yegge gets close to it in this blog (which actually made me lol, good to see that he is back on form), but shies away from it.

If AI is producing a real productivity boom then we should be seeing a flood of high-quality non-AI related software. If building and shipping software is now easier and faster then all of the software that we have that doesn't quite work right should be displaced by high quality successors. It should be happening right now.

So where is it? Why is all this velocity going into tooling around AI instead? Face it, an entire industry has fallen into the trap of building the automation instead of the product they were trying to automate the production of.

Where is the new high quality C compiler that actually compiles the linux kernel to a measurably higher quality than gcc? If AI is really increasing productivity shouldn't we have that instead of a press-oriented hype flop?

gasche has been active on various forums over the years, and yes can confirm that he has infinite patience.

This discussion is a request for positive examples to demonstrate any of the recent grandiose claims about ai assisted development. Attempting to switch instead to attacking the credentials of posters only seems to supply evidence that there are no positive examples, only hype. It doesn't seem to add to the conversation.

If its too large you could just subtract 2*8 and try again.

The first text on the page says:

> The operating system for the next generation of gamers

This is redefining the cutting edge of trolling.

There is a world of difference between the obvious and the trivial. The post you are replying to only implied it was obvious, the retort is unnecessary.

When you work on compilers, all bugs are compiler bugs.

(apart from the ones in the firmware, and the hardware glitches...)

This sounds kind of wild. Love your choice of font. It mentions in the text that your code base is open source - is there a link?

I would prefer that contenteditable divs with multi-line contents would handle newlines in a consistent manner instead of the chaotic mess we have now. But I guess that doesn't pump stock valuations so AI slop it is.

The flat shape of the "r" and the lack of curvature on the "p" where it touches the stem would drive me mad, but YMMV.

Not my kind of thing but still a highly enjoyable read. I love a tale of a software engineer who has gone down a rabbit-hole so deeply that they've come out the other side. And who doesn't like data?

Company that makes vast profits from its monopoly over a digital market is against legislation to stop companies from exploiting monopolies over digital markets.

I am shocked!

Ironically, rather than being facile the point of the comparison is to explain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl%27s_law to people who are clearly not familiar with it.

When I read that "Ilya gave a famously incomprehensible talk about the connections between intelligence and compression" it makes me wonder if Marcus Hutter has now been forgotten? If so more people should take a look at http://prize.hutter1.net/

On the contrary, modern research shows that the effects would be more severe and long-lasting: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2006jd00...

$17 is about £12.69 at the moment so there does not seem to be any dishonesty in the claim.

Is the front supposed to fall off?

At first glance it looks similar to the Monty Hall problem, but it is actually a different problem.

In the Monty Hall problem there is added information in the second round from the informed choice (removing the empty box).

In this problem we don't have the same two-stage process with new information. If the previous process was fair then we know the remaining candidate was better than the eliminated male (and female) candidates. We also know the remaining female candidate was better than the eliminated male (and female) candidates.

So the size of the initial pools does not tell us anything about the relative result of evaluating these two candidates. Most people would choose the candidate from the smaller pool though, using an analogue of the Gambler's Fallacy.

Missed all of that, thanks for the explanation. Why doesn't zig try and apply the coercion before the type switch - is this deliberate for safety?

On point 4, I don't use zig but a two second google leads to http://ratfactor.com/zig/stdlib-browseable2/math/atan.zig.ht...

I wonder about the accuracy of the rest of the article.

It reminds me of the Hamming quote:

"I noticed the following facts about people who work with the door open or the door closed. I notice that if you have the door to your office closed, you get more work done today and tomorrow, and you are more productive than most. But 10 years later somehow you don't know quite know what problems are worth working on; all the hard work you do is sort of tangential in importance. He who works with the door open gets all kinds of interruptions, but he also occasionally gets clues as to what the world is and what might be important."

Each of those little interruptions is a clue about the wider state of the world (codebase / APIs etc). AI offers a shortcut, but it does not provide the same mental world-building.

Mistake in headline: tge article says 54% rate on China. 34 looks like a typo.

Nuclear weapons are not self-improving or self-replicating.

I can't remember the last time I worked on a team without automatic linting enforced on check-in. Why would people choose to waste time arguing over that can be automated?

thanks, i'll try that Nd see if it helps.

> A limitation I see with AI for coding is that your problem must be mainstream to get decent results.

Or to phrase it another way, there must examples of the technique that you want to "generate" in the training set otherwise the horrifically overfitted model cannot work.

Probably a little bit too cynical but this is my experience asking LLMs "unusual" questions.