ori_b

I took a quick look at the source:

      // Fire view events (e.g. unlock_prompt_viewed) for any monetization prompt
      // present in the freshly loaded page. data-analytics-view-events is a JSON
      // array so one rendered prompt can report several events at once.

What's a monetization prompt?

I was definitely reading articles online by the age of 13. This is not exactly a small part of the discourse.

I'd expect, at this point, it's rather hard to avoid hearing about AI and its impact.

Do you think they're too illiterate to read what industry leaders are saying? I assure you they're not.

Banning it in classrooms isn't going to fix things, not when adults are broadcasting to students that (in the actual words of Sam Altman) "intelligence will be too cheap to meter", that (in the words of Darius Amodei) half of white collar jobs will be gone by the time these students graduate school, and so on. If intelligence is too cheap to meter, mental labor is a losing proposition. We've also spent decades emphasizing STEM and de-emphasizing arts and culture. In a world like that, why would anyone value an education?

So, it's no surprise they're going to opt out of a system that's investing trillions to make education useless.

Even if the people building this world are wrong -- not all students are equipped to call some of the wealthiest people in the world complete bullshitters. Not all adults are ready to call them out as bullshitters, for that matter.

"but where are the instances?" is asking "if Bluesky the company disappeared or turned evil, would there be a Bluesky network that kept going?".

> Are brainjobs more important than musclejobs?

Try answering that without your brain.

We're trying to build a world where there's no advantage to having one, so start living in the future you want to build.

Given the overall effects on society, AI use is a little like setting your neighbor's house on fire so that you can roast marshmallows.

Marshmallows are pretty tasty, I guess.

Yes, "use this or be fired" tends to have an impact. A friend once made a analogy to opium: Sure, it's supposed to be addictive, but if you say no anyways, we're going to show up with gunboats.

Maybe figure out the answers to that before forcing everyone into an economy where they still need to work to make money, but any worthwhile jobs have been automated away.

The other question, of course, is what happens to the political power of the newly disposable?

It doesn't have to; it just has to be good enough for any idiot to operate it, and get good enough results.

And if you want 'int **arr[a][b]', it's a value that when you say 'x = **arr[m][n]', will evaluate to an int and assign it to x. Postfix has higher precedence than prefix.

A syntax error. You need a variable name, not a type name, in the middle.

> ... and are we pretending that automating tasks is some strange new idea that has just appeared?

Of course not. Paying people has always been undesirable for the people paying. Software has been an exceptionally cushy job for an exceptionally long time, so people are exceptionally excited to pay less.

Since the act of typing has never been the bulk of a software engineer's time -- the act of understanding has been -- the way that AI speeds up development is by allowing the shortcutting of understanding. The understanding of details is what has historically made software engineers expensive and difficult to replace. Any idiot can type fast, but typing fast doesn't someone a software engineer. The excitement is about automating the understanding of problems, because understanding is expensive.

Yes, why do you think there's so much emphasis on automating it from the management folks? It's more profitable if you don't have to treat your employees well.

[flagged]

The better AI gets, the closer it gets, yes.

If you give up on the details, you lose the ability to do a good job on the high level structure. The entire purpose of the high level structure is setting things up so that the details fit cleanly.

And sometimes buying a statue can be fun, but nobody calls it building a statue.

Being human is not equivalent to having money.

Interesting that you think coding just typing. Code is just a language where the problem is specified in fine detail; the biggest value proposition of an LLM is being able to hand-wave and let some other tool take care of guessing at detail, where you can't be bothered to specify it in full. And, part of the process of specifying in full forces you to rethink design assumptions.

Architecture certainly isn't building, and neither is interior design. Civil engineers calculate and specify the loads in excruciating detail, because if they didn't, people would die.

So why would you buy it off of Anthropic?

And you're actually excited about these table scraps that companies couldn't even monetize, rather than making something?

And you're actually excited by the prospect of buying them from Anthropic instead of making them?

The smartest 5% are able to figure out where they're not welcome.

https://yaledailynews.com/articles/international-grad-school...

???

This is an insane take. Once again, does hiring someone on fiverr to draw for me make me an artist?

What did you score on the quiz? Note that a good number of the options are done by well known and widely revered artists.

If I need to spell it out for you: no artistic 'tool' has yet attempted to automate the thought that goes into art. Would you consider someone an artist if all they did was hire someone off fiverr?

This seems like a non-sequitur. The entire point of AI is that it's able to generalize and perform at or above human level. Let me know the next time your camera is able to simulate conceptualizing something.

Or is your argument that AI is permanently doomed to not work?

And yet, they're good enough to fool most people, which is what you're trying for if you're aiming to automate the production of art. The fact that we got there more than 2 years ago, before agentic coding was even barely useful, should give you an idea of where things are going.