pizzafeelsright

Children would change that, instantly.

I wasn't a father until late in life and then all of a sudden, everything is easy.

The moment I wake up to the moment I go to sleep, every moment has meaning and purpose. Nothing, no meal, no evening, no dollar is wasted.

As my children grow - the only question is how long do I have until I have grandchildren. After that - how long until I no longer have skin in the game?

I do full time AI stuff and it is meaningless other than the provision it provides.

I would not recommend avoiding the biological imperative. Reproduce. Everything else after that moment is clarity.

I have written and maintained AI proxies. They are not terribly complex except the inconsistent structure of input and output that changes on each model and provider release. I figure that if there is a not a < 24 hour turn around for new model integration the project is not properly maintained.

Governance is the biggest concern at this point - with proper logging, and integration to 3rd party services that provide inspection and DLP type threat mitigation.

I like to write personal letters too. I also send emails.

I do the former for fun. The latter to provide for my family.

There is a reason old men take on hobbies like woodworking and fixing old cars and other stuff that has been replaced by technology.

I am not fully certain but juggling is moving objects in a predictable path so as to repeat without dropping.

In my understanding of the OP, juggling 'one' is being able to throw an object consistently to another hand without handing it. This is an intentional throw of the ball from one hand to another without "moving" the other hand to compensate.

Throwing from one hand to another, either directly or in an arc, requires the motorskills to move an object consistently while understanding the speed, trajectory, and then moving the other hand to receive (not catch) it as expected.

There are multiple elements at play with 3 object juggling. One must throw an arc toss to the other hand, while holding an object, then throwing the object in said hand to free the hand to catch. In reality you are holding two objects with one in motion - until you get the double arc which is now technically juggling.

Three bodies in motion, two hands that are each making circular or figure eight motions, while maintaining a consistent arc and speed (XY (no Z) + T = arc) where the mind either tracks or forgets allowing the predictable movements work themselves into only tracking one object at a time - by setting it's path and then shifting focus or attention to the next.

Knives are surprisingly fun to juggle. Due to my pain tolerance (or stupidity) I would throw knives up, catch them by the blade (pinching) or using a soft hands, where I match their falling speed, catch them on a finger tip while it remains vertical. Also, I would find myself spinning a folding blade end over end, and catching by the handle, based upon the rotations (minus one because you flip from the sharp end).

This is why normal folk use quarts and gallons so there is no confusion. An mg vs ng of astrophage is deadly.

I gladly spend $5k a month if I could make $10k. I too need to figure out how to start the "making XXX a month" part.

The entire tooling ecosystem is in flux.

Looking forward, the future is ad-hoc disposable software that once would take a large team a dozen sprints to release.

Eventually it'll be use case -> spec -> validation -> result.

The tv show Stargate showed different controls that scientifically calculated and operated starships so all the operator had to do was point the controls in the direction of the destination. The ai/computer/hardware knows how to get to the result and that result is human driven.

I have evidence of this at work and in my own life with the key component being the tooling integration.

Email is fixed by avoiding the usage. I only check my email for password resets and bank notifications. I never send email. Every other channel of communication with anyone outside of work is a text message.

Trim your scope and define your response format prior to asking or commanding.

Most of my questions are "in one sentence respond: long rambling context and question"

My personal experience is we're seeing a magnification of results. The slog is reading hundreds of files, updating some active code to remove some old function from 100k lines of code. Last week the modification, while trivial, would have took weeks and AI agents were able to correct the code with 100% verified accuracy in 20 minutes.

I love the idea.

Each year I have the wife take curated photos from our shared accounts with an overview of the event photographed.

This is then bound into a 1/2 inch book with 50 pages. We now have a dozen years of annualized memories that we can pass around with physical access.

She has done this for others with great success. The personal touches make it well worth what she charges.

I am not certain this is that big of a deal outside of "making AI better".

At this point, is there any magic in software development?

If you have super-secret-content is a third party the best location?

This is the path forward, with some overhead.

1. Generic model that calls other highly specific, smaller, faster models. 2. Models loaded on demand, some black box and some open. 3. There will be a Rust model specifically for Rust (or whatever language) tasks.

In about 5-8 years we will have personalized models based upon all our previous social/medical/financial data that will respond as we would, a clone, capable of making decisions similar with direction of desired outcomes.

The big remaining blocker is that generic model that can be imprinted with specifics and rebuilt nightly. Excluding the training material but the decision making, recall, and evaluation model. I am curious if someone is working on that extracted portion that can be just a 'thinking' interface.

I implement them.

Absolutely. There is a preflight guardrail that steers specific words, phrases, concepts with tweaked output.

I'm not on either side. I'm certainly not a fan of a company or government, both with the ability to negativity affect my life in considerable ways if I am unwilling to bow to the current whim of leadership.

Corporate life under a tyrant who demands prayers or pronouns were unthinkable not long ago. Today if enough leverage is used to press the buttons the demands on us workers may be unpleasant at best or deny us our livelihood.

It's a metaphor for the power of death in the hands of others.

No. (for the sake of the game/time) Do I think it is happening? Probably. If so, Punish them? Yes.

My turn? A hypothetical group of men with a swords are intent on doing something you disagree with. Would it be wise to attempt to stop them while unarmed and outnumbered?

Are you sure you are aware what tribe I belong to, if any? I was speaking from a position of "anyone" with the power of the sword.

My work day starts with "what must I accomplish today?"

Then I tackle that list.

Sometimes the list changes.

"Focus work" happens as pressure vs desire mingle.

The real question is "what is expected of me in the next four hours?" And suddenly my work is structured.

Where do we find this tagging?

Derf, I challenge your next comment to be the opposite of which what you want to respond.

I was ignoring the language translation with excessive simplification while speaking of a framework.

To your specific point: no, grace abounds for those who remain in conversation and continue to repair the situation.

As for having a single 'yes', we backwater Americans have multiple versions including yeah, okay, yup, ya, yessssss, hell yes, yuppers, uh huh, right, right-o, got it, absolutely, and I am sure a dozen more.

I am speaking of intent. The intent, regardless of the language used, commnunicate in a way that both parties have no assumptions and if there is a miscommunication on anyone's part, both parties work to resolve it without blame. And I thank you for your reply, my dude, which I take as a verbal suffix of casual frustration. English is not my first language mind you.

These are two different problems.

AI has solved the 'coding' part. The business is still very human because they are the ones buying, for now.

Mainframe -> Desktop -> Server Room -> Data Center -> Cloud (rented data center) -> Space (Skynet)

I live in a different world than most where the expectation is we speak the truth, stand behind our word, and in the event of failure we maintain the relationship after resolving the conflict.

As for saving face, I provide opportunities to walk back, restate, or take back something that was said. People get angry, misspeak, or respond with fear and that is understandable.

Lying. It is called lying, deceit, or bearing false witness.

In my house I do not permit "yeah", or "okay". It is "yes" and anything else is interpreted as a 'no'.

Once you press someone to speak a "yes" as a solid commitment, for example to an understanding of an instruction. If this puts the person on the defensive then you are dealing with someone who is not interested in being held accountable.

Let your yes be yes.

My experience has been that if the skill is broken down into a function, possibly paired with a validator in another stage, you're at 99.9% deterministic.

I have not yet tested this at scale but give me six months.

Someone bought that bridge and it stands in Arizona.