sodapopcan

Well it's kinda both. One step towards socio-economic change would be if everyone just stopped giving billionaires upwards of $200/month, and didn't have their companies give it to them on their behalf.

> I think this comment is reacting to a different argument than the one the article is actually making.

The headline.

I think they're saying it's inevitable for billion dollar capitalist companies. /not-s

And anyway, companies that just want to make a really good living doing what they love are lame. /s

OH SNAP! Well then, maybe there will be a new one in my future! I haven't had mine very long and really enjoying it which is why it popped right into mind as a response to this post.

Yes, good callout! The one from IKEA is metal (usually not an IKEA fan but some good stuff like this and it's under $100, but of course there are tons of other options).

Shoehorn!

Particularly a long one if you'd like to avoid bending down at all when putting on slip-ons. Of course they are primarily great for saving the backs of your shoes. The IKEA one is perfect (at least for 6'1" me).

I believe that's known as "The Steve Jobs Solution" but don't quote me on that. Regardless, just don't hold it that way.

"Can't you just..."

The beginning of every sentence from a non-technical coworker when I told them their request was going to take some time or just not going to happen.

It's their platform, they can do whatever they want. Not everything has to be everything for everybody. And if you think they're irrelevant why would bother wasting your time commenting?

Getting annoying, yes, not more annoying than the actual slop, though, that's ridiculous.

Absolutely evil.

Oh I do! But I'm also a (failed) musician so a bit bitter (lol). Still do it for fun, though!

> but crap that top pop artists vomit out into the world doesn't

It should!

> You're just mad that people actually like AI music.

Yes, I am! I'm also mad that people like shitty over-produced pop, though (including me sometimes), so what can you do. Life is shit.

Ya, "AI" is too broad a term. This was already possible without "AI" as we know it today, but of course it was still the same idea back then. I get what you're saying, though: would he have bothered if he'd have to have found the right filters/plugins on his own? idunno.

> the process of AI-centric software development is better regarded as a pair-design and pair-coding process, treating the AI more like a person than a tool.

This is the part that makes me throw up in my mouth a bit, I'd rather pair with a human. But whatever, I'm old. You'll have to excuse me as as there are a lot of nefarious-looking clouds out there.

> the analogy might be writing in assembler vs writing in your high level language of choice.

If it were deterministic, yes, but it's not. When I write in a high level language, I never have to check the compiled code, so this comparison makes no sense.

If we see new kinds of languages, or compile targets, that would be different.

> Future revenue can't be stolen.

This is a big eye-roll but otherwise ya, this is one way to think of it. It's not all about money, though. The people running these companies are just taking, en masse, without credit. This is a basic human desire. Of course there is a discussion of whether or not we should evolve beyond that. It feels incredibly dystopian to me, though.

It's not as simple as calling it theft, but it is simply theft, plus the other good points you made.

> killed Tailwind Labs

They are still around.

> "Give everything away for free and this people will leave technology"

This is more interesting, although somewhat generally understood (can be conflated with people seeing "free" and "cheap" and therefore undesirable). It depends on your definitely of longevity but we certainly have a LOT of free software that has, so far, lasted the test of time.

I mean you learn things about the shell ans shell scripting in general which you do retain. Also shell config is one of those rare things that doesn't "inevitably break." The only stuff that breaks are related to program settings which omzsh isn't going to handle anyway. You end up learning a bit and have a much lighter config. Case-in-point, you had to spend some time combing through and learning all the aliases it defines you when you could maintain a small few that you actually want. Also, zsh has plugins natively.

You really only have to go through that once and it's a good learning experience.

Agreed but it's not even that. I worked with someone who was insanely fast with RubyMine. All the shortcuts were second-nature and shit just flew onto the screen. So generally, the argument would be to be really good with whatever editor you have. It also goes outside of that, like snippets are still very viable for lots of boilerplate.

At the same time, one of the best developers I worked with was a two-finger typist who had to look at the keyboard. But again, I don't care if you're going to use AI (well, that's not entirely true but not going to get into it) but the tone of this article that "You should learn it, " I take issue with.

Seems some people I know who really like AI aren't particularly good with their editors. Lots of AI zealots use the "learn your tools" when they are very slow with their editors. I'm sure that's not true across the board, but the sentiment that it's not worth it to get really advanced with your editor has been pretty prevalent for a very long time.

I don't care if you use AI but leave me alone. I'm plenty fast without it and enjoy the process this author callously calls "wrestling with computers."

Of course this isn't going to help with the whole "making me fast at things I don't know" but that's another can of worms.

Hosting, marketing, other promotional stuff (conferences, maybe other?), there are still three people on the payroll and otherwise I don't know (which was part of my point) as I've never run a business like this before myself. Oh, subscriptions to AI services... that's pricey I hear ;)

Not necessarily. We don't know what all their costs are, but it's a lot more than just salaries. I'm sure there was a lot of uncertainty in how long those sponsorships would last. There are any number of factors. Adam also stated in a podcast [0] that he laid people of now in order to ensure they he could give them generous severance packages. I'm sure people will have thoughts on that but whatever, I think that makes sense.

[0] https://adams-morning-walk.transistor.fm/episodes/we-had-six...

Hopefully! Turns out 75% was of four total developers. Ideally Google would be giving them enough to re-hire three people.

Source: https://adams-morning-walk.transistor.fm/episodes/we-had-six...

All good :D

Right. Again, it's colloquial. These things happen in languages.

Ha, technically correct but also a little nitty. "First" and "second" are colloquial used here as "main" and "other." But again, you're not wrong.