827 karma · joined June 26, 2014
hn684 [at] aryeh [dot] sent [dot] com
Not looking forward to the inevitable “wanna”, “gonna” and “lemme” appearing as AI output based on their popular use.
So all that remains for our so called “engineering” discipline, is an answer that says something that doesn't break a lot.
No. It is the primarily the cost of providing their free service.
Thanks, gave me a chuckle. One to remember.
Who wants that on their web site? In some jurisdictions you’re going to be in trouble for facilitating hate and calls for violence (or worse). This is why what you have implemented will not work in its current form. I suggest you move to a system that characters can trigger only standard phrases and emoticons.
A couple of decades ago I was leading a project migrating one of the main applications widely used by actuaries.
Those were the days - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48641095
30 years ago or so, I was a contractor working on back-to-back 3 to 12 month C++ projects. I would typically get a call one day from a recruiter followed by a phone call (or maybe a quick meet or coffee) with someone technical on the project, and arrive and be in the codebase the next. That day I would get 2 calls about my availability.
There was no sh*t-show of continuous deployment, code reviews (even for trusted internal projects), and scrum-like ceremonies. There was instead version control, periodic tested releases, a weekly update meeting, a Friday team lunch at the pub, and trust.
Too many programmers (sorry err Engineers) - too few jobs, and the enshitification of an industry.
Of course, the real issue is that a prospective employer doesn’t know what they want. Our “engineering” industry runs on vibes, heroic effort, fashion and hype-cycles. Someone very smart, enthusiastic, quick learning, flexible and affable is the only real job description.
Combine this with the “supply” side entirely overwhelming demand, having to compete with AI, and experience having no value, and for most software developers the future is bleak until a new more equitable equilibrium is found.
Nevertheless in the meantime, at least one can have solace in collecting the authors “failure stamps”.
Is this something being seen across all outsourcers like Accenture, Wipro, Infosys etc?
It questions the initial wisdom of creating lots of little independent distributed apps, without regards to interaction between them. Let’s build ever more necessary plumbing and schemes just to enable their interaction.
I am arguing that durable workflows should be a last resort for boundaries you must cross, not a default pattern for every business process.
Subscriptions can be equally profitable depending on the total actual tokens used across users. Few subscriptions use 100% of their potential, but these memes that subscriptions are unsustainable always seem to assume it to be so.
“Notice: Any comments made by <name> or on behalf of <organization> that are interpreted by AI in this meeting, may not be accurate.”
I do this in every meeting.
Deterministic workflows using AI to help perform those steps not requiring human input has been an area of interest for me for some time. Particularly interesting how you are using the AI to determine what a step has achieved and the action of the next step.
Combine it with workflow elements that does handle human steps together with a notification/routing/task system would make for a helpful system for so many.
It seems to be the stated expectation, but I find it incredulous that management really would believe that?