hansmayer

It makes perfect sense / there was that talk by the ex-Google CEO Eric Schmidt saying something along the lines "imagine you could develop the software, but without that arrogant programmer". They just hate people, that's all.

For the folks who need their IDE but w/o the slop and constant notifications, there is very good public fork called VSCodium: https://vscodium.com/

Not only is it free of MS "telemetry" nonsense, it is also way quieter to use, no bullshit popups for updates etc.

> can define and describe everything.

Can it also fully describe a composition by Bach or a Rembrandt's painting? In some weird, overly complex way it probably 'could', but it would be very painful. That's why we pick other forms of expression. We use other forms of expression to compact and optimise information delivery. Another benefit is that we cut out the noise. So yes UML cannot describe everything natural language can, but then again why should it - it was designed as a specific framework for designing relations between objects. Not more and not less. Similar for sequence diagrams or other forms of communicating ideas efficiently.

A lot of people sadly, nowadays don't have anything resembling to a social life and family... So here we are now, specmaxxing and shit :)

But Paul Graham says that the guy from Replit whom he funded told him the source code is "object code" now, so we don't need to look at it all ? It must be utter wisdom since PG managed to get wealthy by selling some website during dotcom-mania so he must have insights we are missing?

Let's cut through the noise - what did you build with this very elaborate process and how much ARR is it generating ?

> will always care what the spec says, and that’s never going to change

Did I miss something or is everyone back in 1970s, working in waterfall processes now?

Yeah. Waiting to be left behind...since 2020...

Read the room. What you "built" is neither exciting, nor something most people want to "try". Why? Because just like other AI boosters, you are still trying to somehow optimise the usage of natural language to make it work. But it will never "work" because the way the stochastic ML system is built, it has a failure built into the system.

:) Here is a crazy thought - what if we had some kind of a narrowed down, specific subset of normal language which would translate into specific computer-level instructions. So for example, instead of telling computer to read something from a file and transform it in a certain way, you actually had a specific instruction to open a file, which worked the same each time you used it and guaranteed to fail if you used it the wrong way? Wow, the possibilities are endless :)

> We are entering the post-slop era. My software is more robust, better tested, better integrated, and more observable than ever before. And my velocity keeps increasing!

Don't we just love the hard fact conclusions based on sample size N=1 and hand-waving arguments?

Well then, why would you ask them that in this context? Just out of interest and out of the topic context?

Not just intransparent, but also unfair. Why? I think you know this very well, but lets say I need to reprompt your LLM wrapper x times, because, as usually ia the case with these slot machines, they did not give me what I asked for. So now I burn additional tokens you will happily bill me for, without having it in my power to impact how well the underlying LLM works. So its neither under my control, nor do I have a clue as to how to keep token usage under control. So your model for pricing is neither transparent nor fair to me. And as is taught in every business 101, for a business to auccessfuly acquire customers, customers must see the price as transparent AND perceive it as fair.

Well, clunkiness and inherent imprecision for one? We don't need to turn every determinisic application into an LLM wrapper, which produces corrrect outputs x℅ of the time, where x < 100. I can only imagine the negative impact if auch tools become widely spread, we already see the damage the AI slop is creating in hyperscaler infrastructure, software, content etc. To now translate this into the world of physical machines and structures, bears even greater risk. Plus your subscription model is a. super-intransparent, based on token usage b. Risky, as your pricing is clearly dependent on the AI-model providers billing, which as we see from the recent GH Copilot episode, is set up for significant hikes across the board.

Text-to-CAD? No please, sounds like a really bad idea.

Since you seem to be mentioning 'destiny', 'life arc' and 'advice' -it may be wise to put in some kind of a legal disclaimer for your own sake -- the use of LLM toys for advice about life and similar have led to some really bad outcomes, even suicides as we know now.

Really, wasn't yours? I mean you literally used "net jobs created" as an argument ?

But it was not my argument, was ot?

> that brings in net new jobs

Ah yes, those invaluable tens of jobs created by DCs....

> Do people love being a hollow puppet for LLMs to fill in? Have people lost their identity?

The first question, answer is yes - most people live their lives mindlessly, with or w/o LLMs (think every idiot you knew 20 years go throwing in punch lines from "Friends" to sound "funny"), To the second question - most people have a twisted view of identity. It is supposed to mean something identifying you uniquely,but to the most people it means, identifying you as a member of a large group (nationality/political view/religion/major music genre you like). So, now when every proverbial Dick, Tom and Harry use LLMs to generate Confluence content with shiny emojis, what are the proverbial Emily or John to do? Of course, they will adopt this new identity - its who people are now - shallow, hollow puppets for LLMs to fill in. And to think of the irony - mother Nature perfected this super-efficient, low energy and highly capable thinking machine, each and every one of us holds in their skull. Its already put us on the moon once, before we even had a semblance of a functioning computer! And we choose to throw it away, for fucking what? Verbal diarrhea and pain inducing coloured walls of texts?

All so some retarded antisocial VC-funded "AI founder" can call themselves a tech visionary?

How about writing "all code" this June, as Dario Amodei announced in January this year?

Wow, such a nasty view to hold. What's next, the Altman's bullshit argument about "all the food" that the humans need to grow up and develop brain ? Humans are intelligent. Humans can generalise and invent new concepts, ideas and art. LLMs are none of that.

Oh for crying out loud! Let's stop inventing fake analogies to justify the inherent LLM shortcomings! Those of us who are critical - are only using the standards that the LLM companies set themselves ("superintelligence", "pocket phds" bla blabla), to hold them accountable. When does the grift stop?

> while the general public find examples which the AI can't do

We must have very different experiences with the general public then, because from my interactions, some non-tech demographics who are leaning way too much into it:

- teachers - realtors - generic "office worker", - and even some doctors!

What is common to all of them - it would seem they are highly unaware of the technology deficiencies, as they seem to use it routinely and daily - thus considering it as some kind of upgraded google search.

Well obviously they have - but the press and the common folk still treat these people as some kind of geniuses, when they are obviously more similar to that junior dev using some framework without understanding its internals.

Not surprising at all. They probably feel or expect to have many such issues that are not surfaced yet, because like with OpenAI goblin "issue" we see that these guys have no clue what they are doing.

So giving this guy his 200$ back would open the flood gates for other such requests. Their behaviour, as much as it is weird and antisocial, perhaps even breaking some laws - is completely logical in their own weird world of "Datacenter PhD nation" or whatever other bullshit they use to hype up their "product".

> We unknowingly gave particularly high rewards for metaphors with creatures. From there, the goblins spread.

WTF does this even mean? How the hell do you do something like this "unknowingly"? What other features are you bumping "unknowingly"? Suicide suggestions or weapon instructions come to mind. Horrible, this ship obviously has no captain!

For me, the worst part is how these ghouls manage to ruin everything with their bullshit technology. Once they touch something unique and make it "AI" it just gets ruined. Now whenever I see something resembling that style, I have to assume it's the bullshit AI. And that's just a minor nuisance - now every underdeveloped idiot uses it to "up their game" with consequences we are only going to understand completely in the upcoming years.

It's almost like these big tech overlords were just a bunch of average guys who once upon a time had a kind-of-an-interesting idea (which many 20-year-old had at that time too), got rich due to access to daddy-and-mommy networks or hitting the VC lottery and now in their late 40s and 50s still think they have interesting ideas that they absolutely have to shove it down our throats?

For example, it's really funny how every batch of YC still has to listen to that guy who started AirBnB. Ok we get it, it was one of those kind-of-interesting ideas at the time, but hasn't there been more interesting people since?

I mean people will shamelessly paste you a wall of text from LLM while chatting with you to prove a point, probably thinking how they outsmarted you now...