kesor

Binary bits are also a language. A structured language that transistor-based computers execute into some result we humans find valuable. Why wouldn't a model be able to write these binary instructions directly? Why do we need all these layers in between? We don't.

Probably because then it wouldn't be software anymore. That is because you will be required to do a physical process (print an integrated circuit) in order to use the functionality you created. It can definitely be done, but it takes it too far away from the idea the author expressed.

But I don't see a reason why the LLM shouldn't be writing binary CPU instructions directly. Or programming some FPGA directly. Why have the assembly language/compiler/linked in between? There is really no need.

We humans write some instructions in English. The LLM generates a working executable for us to use repeatedly in the future.

I also think it wouldn't be so hard to train such a model. We have plenty of executables with their source code in some other language available to us. We can annotate the original source code with a model that understands that language, get its descriptions in English, and train another model to use these descriptions for understanding the executable directly. With enough such samples we will be able to write executables by prompting.

I don't think there is a need for an output language here at all, the LLM can read and write bits into executables directly to flip transistors on and off. The real question is how the input language (i.e. prompts) look like. There is still a need for humans to describe concepts for the machine to code into the executable, because humans are the consumers of these systems.

Don't train them to emulate humans. Train them to emulate compilers instead.

No need for using assembler, LLMs should be writing machine bits directly into executables. It is also fairly simple to teach them how to do it. Provided we have some executable that was written in some human-readable computer language. We can read through the bits of the executable, and describe each portion using English, based on the description of what the original human-readable language is doing. This new model will only learn the English representation of chunks of bits and how they go together into an executable. After learning several billion such narrated executables it will be excellent at writing machine code.

So ... dating apps just need to remove text messages and replace them with voice messages. Problem solved. Thanks!

This is just like vibe coding. In vibe coding, you snapshot the results of the LLM's implementation into files that you reuse later.

This project could use something like that. Perhaps ask the LLM to implement a way to store/cache the snapshots of its previous answers. That way, the more you use it, the faster it becomes.

CueCat it was an affordable barcode scanner that anyone could have connected to their computer, and it scanned barcodes. It took almost two decades before we could finally do it again with our mobile phones.

Skype ; Because my R.I.P. grandma was using it to talk to her relatives overseas just like she would use a phone, but it didn't cost an arm and a leg (unlike phone calls).

ICQ ; It was the first instant messenger, the technology could have adopted voice (and not get disrupted by Skype) and mobile (and not get disrupted by whatsapp) and group chat (and not get disrupted by slack/discord). But they didn't even try and put up a fight.

Geocities ; It was a "put your html here" Free web hosting back when people barely knew what html was. Today you have to be a rocket scientist to find a way to host a free static "simple" page online.

Pivotal Tracker ; Users loved it, it had an excellent model for tracking work and limiting work in progress on software projects. There is no real good alternative and the usual suspects for tracking project work are horrible in comparison.

Google Wave ; It had a bunch of agents participating in editing the text together with you, making spelling fixes, finding additional information to enrich your content, and so much more.

And you can vet that Helix will not be stealing your personal information now and in the future? What an asinine comment. There is no security, the computer is spying on you, you can't really vet anything.

When someone is competent, as must be after using a tool for 20 years (not days). Expecting that someone to complain about a difficulty for something trivial is surprising. There are other ways to highlight that it is easier or simpler in Helix to have working LSP, for example, saying it is "as easy as in vscode". But it is definitely bewildering why would the OP choose to start by bragging of the vast experience, and then focus on a complaint that most people expect from someone who has very little experience.

"Using vim/nvim for 20 years". "cba to configure LSPs its too hard". What?

Advantages of using nix are so numerous, it would be a sin to even try to list all of them. Suffice it to say that using HM and Nix to manage dotfiles is the ultimate peak of what one can do. I just wanted to write +1 but thought that would be too short.

AirPods being a "huge part of Apple's profits" because people keep losing them, and they keep breaking, so you always need to buy a new pair every several months. Hardly a product worth praising.

And yet it has 300M weekly downloads. I am fairly sure that most of these are not because it is a direct dependency of people's projects, but rather it is a dependency of a dependency of a dependency.

Is it? When every developer has an IDE that can easily format the code in whichever the way they prefer, and minify it back just before pushing a commit.

You don't need a special grep for every language, you just need a tool that translates the mini version into the formatted version and back. Then you chain the tools, just like anything else in UNIX.

Minified JS often comes with mangling the names of functions, variables, etc... Formatters and prettifiers lack the ability to bring back the original names and meaning.

This is how Chrome Dev Tools shows source code. The original is often minified or in whatever format the author left it. And when you check the "pretty" checkbox in dev tools, it shows up using whichever format Chrome developers decided it should look like.

Can I add a testimonial?

Run the thing, clicked a song, it said it can't play it, removed the thing.

What about all the people who are now priced-out from working at all because it is not economic for the business to employ them at these rates?

Fiat currencies are like Unicorns and Santa Claus, they stop existing when people grow up and stop believing in them. And there is no need for a "replacement" (i.e. the nothing is better argument) or a need for "enforcement" (i.e. the military argument) or a need for a "system" (i.e. the rule-based-order & courts argument). Fiat currencies simply die off due to lack of trust and belief, and it often happens by way of Gresham's Law.

As the message says, this is not new.

When you want to open this website using Brave anyway, you have to change your User Agent. You can do that by opening "Network conditions" in the three-dotted menu in developer tools, and setting a different User Agent value.

Companies didn't ask your opinion when they offshore manufacturing to Asia. They didn't ask your opinion when they offshore support to call centers in Asia. Companies don't ask your opinion, they do what they think is best for their financial interest, and that is how capitalism works.

Once upon a time, not too long ago, there was someone who would bag your groceries, and someone who would clean your window at the gas station. Now you do self-checkout. Has anyone asked for this? Your quality of life is worse, the companies are automating away humanity into something they think is more profitable for them.

In a society where you don't have government protection for such companies, there would be other companies who provide a better service whose competition would win. But when you have a fat corrupt government, lobbying makes sense, and crony-capitalism births monopolies which cannot have any competition. Then they do whatever they want to you and society at large, and they don't owe you, you owe them. Your tax dollars sponsor all of this even more than your direct payments do.

Skill issue

Fairly certain we do. Salaries depend on the position, but as a general rule they are competitive.