pnt12

I guess OP was using the user centric approach of measuring success, however naive or ir realistic it is nowadays.

That's the problem: ad based apps want to keep you there, not solve your problems.

I thought about a dating app where you pay for entry and that's it. Then the incentive is that you don't need it anymore ASAP, because the more time you spend there, the more costs.

Theres a network problem, where it must be high quality, successful, and with lots of people before people are willing to pay. Maybe it would need to start with a free trial in a small region to get some traction before, and rolled out slowly.

Nitpick: I think that's called skimpflation (worse quality), a friend of shrinkflation (less quantity) or inflation (higher prices).

I agree with the article, but I like to write, while lots of people just see it as a chore.

To people who don't like to write a ticket or PR description, the AI text is better than nothing.

In Portugal, you can get a good wine for 5 euros, but we are not great at marketing ourselves.

Digital euro is an ongoing initiative by the ECB that aims to reach the whole European union.

Fully agree. If someone questions the film, one also has to question the Israeli government - which is proved, not suspected, to spread lies not only within its country but also internationally via social media (bots, paid influencer) and lobbying.

The administration doesn't like it, therefore it's a threat. Similar to negative news, which are fake, and contrary opinions, which are woke propaganda.

Many symptoms of undercover fascism.

Just assume the worse then, save yourself some time.

Yes, and given it's now owned by Elon Musk, who is not trustworthy, it's possible he would try to do it.

Although I wouldn't take an Openai announcement literally, as Sam Altman is also not trustworthy.

Even if it's illegal, who's stopping him?

Until anyone does, "crime is legal", as coffeezilla says.

That's a disfuncional view: "we set the rules, take it or leave it". In Switzerland there are strict requirements, but if you're a law abiding and employed migrant, ie contributing to the country, the services help you fill the paperwork so you can stay.

Even considering the disfuncional way, one thing it's to say "you only stay if we allow". The other is to say "you only leave if you allow": that's a much more authoritarian position.

These policies will work and immigration will lower for sure. Let's see the outcome in a few years.

Exactly. If I buy a new jacket from a store and it's durable, fashionable and warm, I'm not complaining - I exchangedml my money for a valuable product!

Macroeconomics are a different beast but I think it still holds (and not that Trump knows a thing about them). A country with a productive economy may buy some valuable products from other countries. It becomes a problem if it's buying everything and not selling anything.

A lot of software engineers don't have a good feel for this kind of aesthetics or social outcomes. They're playing with their new toy (which is very exciting, let's not ignore that), they're happy it does stuff, but ignore that it can be perceived as ugly and cheap by others. As well as totally bland - every other cheap company is using it too.

Why not have the customer talk to an llm and iterate on the plan? Many customers will appreciate the 30m back and forth replacing the multiple hour meetings.

People are subtracting a lot of hard parts from their thinking, and think it's simpler than it is. What happens when the test suite isn't testing the real thing? The ci/cd doesn't even start? There is a bug requiring a hot fix ASAP? The code is growing into a nasty meatball and spaghetti dish, and the llms just turn shift it around. What about when the agent starts thinking in circles and neefs guidance to start working?

I'm not a ludite: I use llms every day, but I try not to be a meat proxy. Some one off scripts are vibe coded, but applications need real maintainable code.

My prediction for winners and losers: some companies will lay off a ton of programmers and replace with AI, with short term success but long term big problems. Other companies will use llms to boost productivity, but keep their engineers responsible for the health of the products. Short term gains won't be as impressive, but productivity will be higher and the company will be competitive in the long term.

Oof. Gets screwed by a monopoly, defends monopolies: idealism is a chain. It frustrates me how some people are buried in this ideology, given 90% of it would be denied with Economics 101.

Yes, free markets are good to a lot of things. No, they don't adjust for complex matters if consumers don't understand then. No, they don't work when monopolies are involved. No, the government setting some boundaries is not the same as socialism.

Example: company adds a cheap ingredient to food that makes it tastier. Studies show a high chance of cancer. This doesn't affect the company margins, so it keeps adding and selling. Consumers are unaware, they keep buying. A good willing competitor has a dillema: poison its customers or lose clients to competition. Guess who can help? The state: it can forbid that ingredient! Now this levels the field for all companies and customers are healthy.

I'm from Portugal and we have a strong espresso culture, as in 90% of the people probably have multiple espresso every day. Many Portuguese agree that Starbucks espresso sucks compared to most conventional cafes. At most people go there for the American type drinks, which are a complete different style (and the coffee flavor hides behind all other ingredients, it doesn't have to be that good).

"Humans can do x, therefore non humans can do it too", says the guy with a degree in philosophy! Surely not formal philosophy:)

Jokes aside I always thought this was a crap argument. If you can get more useful signals into a system, it's likely to perform better. Duh!

But never argue with a CEO: their interest is profit, not honest conversations.

Need to replay it, or try the sequel. Is it any good?

It only applies to big companies for now, and it's not rocket science - stores already had to deal with unsold inventory.

I helped a charity that distributed misc items to families who needed them, and I remembered seeing lots of brand new t-shirts from a big supermarket chain. Guess they were already doing it 10 years ago, either due to local regulation or as a tax write-off.

First I was intrigues by the rationalist movement, but I was deeply disappointed. To put it bluntly, seems to me like geeks LARPing as philosophers, and not with rational argument as they promise, but rationalizing their sci fi fanfictions.

It seems especially bad now. This relativistic mindset is really bad for critical thought: "oh, it was never 100% fair". Well, if it was 80% earlier, it seems approaching 20% now. It's a whole new level.

FromSoftware really puts design first, so it doesn't surprise me they use a classic AI and then leave it up to the designers to craft memorable experiences.

This was published in 2018, vut I believe some things have worsened in the last years for the west. Some examples are: Housing crysis, wars, rise of the alt right, loneless epidemic, betting, scrolling addiction.

The article shows a really good point: statements must be accountable on their own, and cannot rely on "further research". This makes complete sense: at what point can I libel someone, and then dodge consequences with "if you do your research, you can get the facts"?

Another point from the article: they are not just aggregating content, but generating it. If you generate falsehoods, that are not even stated by your sources, of course you're responsible.

This can have significant impact to AI in Germany and the rest of Europe, but it's good to question it and hold people accountable.

Indexes have rules for entry, so people using them supposedly agree with them. On the other hand, they were talking about opening exceptions for these companies, which was not part of the initial rules.

Both can be true:

It may not be worthy to question Oracle and Larry motives - it's money, at the cost of anything else (although his pro Israel stance may unveil some other ideology too).

But it's worthy to say they should be held accountable for the scrap they do. Unless we grow so cynical to think the system is deeply rotten and cannot be changed - which is a valid feeling to have given all ongoing events, but there's also some glimmers of hope here and there that are gaining traction.

Fuck the TOS.

When I purchase stuff, I don't wanna read a legal contract. No one wants, no one does.

The contrariam in me thinks: If the contract is that crucial, let's have a mandatory, non skippable, slow scrolling of it, or maybe audio version slowly read.

I bet all TOS would get much simpler and tame!

Also, in my country, more hospitalizations would be quite severe, as the hospitals are already short staffed. There were also not enough masks for everyone to mitigate it.

I think a lot of anti-lock down claims are too simplistic. There were too many unknowns, and there's little consensus about the ideal outcomes.

(I'm a bit biased: I was able to do remote work and move to my parents house, which is quite spacious and near the woods, so I could go outside a bit - so it didn't affect my finances or mental health too much)

But also "we don't know"! = "it's NOT a big deal".

I'm OK with some caution.

New statue in London. Banksy, maybe.