My optimistic take on this is that they are still in process. One or two man team might be able to code as fast as 6 or 10 man team in some cases, but the design process takes just as long. GTA6 has a crazy amount of resources and programmers on it, but still takes years to come out-- because they have to balance, develop content, playtest and find bugs, etc. even if bug fixing was instantaneous and thinking of something made it happen, it would still take a lot of time. So someone making something great as a solo developer is still going to take as long as a small team of people making something great before. Which is years.
My philosophical take is that there are different types of coders, the ones who did it because they wanted to see their design be implemented and those who love the technical puzzle (with obvious overlap). The technical puzzle is taking a hit currently, but I think it will still exist in some form; the designer trying to get something implemented still loves the design work primarily which is sorely lacking in current LLMs, but if they don't have enough technical knowledge they will still get slapped in the face by technical gaps and bugs that LLMs make.
For corporate stuff, I think bureaucracy and issues with churn reduce the effectiveness of using an LLM because the most effective way might be anathema to corporate fiefdoms and structure. The churn is a problem for everyone though...
The AI is a fantastic assistive tool, and in many ways it surpass my skillset as a software developer(I'm a skilled software developer, although it's not my job).
However, I do not believe I would be able to build what I'm building using LLMs, without myself having the right skills.
This ignores the fact that there are also things that China does better or equal than Western companies. Like robots, solar panels, electric cars (?), AI models, electronics.
They must be good at something, otherwise China wouldn't be where it is.
So flat out dismissing anything from China is not enough of an argument.
Mind you, I'm not saying you're generally wrong, just your "generally" is wrong. ;-)
As defrost suggested, your comments have been autokilled as our software classifies them as likely LLM-generated or edited/polished. Please don't do this on HN. The community here much prefers imperfect-but-authentic writing, and we very much appreciate the effort!
Exactly. It's got nothing to do with sensory input and everything to do with reasoning.
If someone asked me how many f's are in a word I hadn't seen before verbally, then a reasoned response would be that I don't know, but I estimate based on the syllables...or ask them to spell it out.
These are all the sorts of questions where general problem solving works, even if the conclusion is "I don't have enough data to speculate".
So that these models fall apart on it so readily means we're either grossly handicapping then with the requirement to "be helpful" or they just fail to recognize the problem and are just stochastically spitting out a high probability token sequence for the input.
I OCR'd my Chinese textbooks and made a stateless MCP that allows me to ground my Chinese language studies according to the textbook only. With this I can start a quiz, understand differences between words that have similar meanings knowing no extra grammar is fed when reviewing. I specifically use it with glm 5.3 as it is the most language specific LLM that understands nuances.
I will chose to make a bridge or detour a road once via collective effort, over rebuilding the entire burnt village every ten years. Beaver territories stop wildfires, and they take care of the forever maintenance of the firewalls for free, releasing tax money that can be spent in better things.
They also provide an invaluable service slowing floods, creating fisheries for humans, and increasing touristic appeal from a location (we are naturally attracted by the aesthetics of watching water). Ponds also create relatively safe sanctuaries where wildlife, cattle and humans can retreat in case of wildfires.
So, yes, there are many cons, but also many pros. Beavers compete with us for low places and shouldn't be allowed everywhere, but to eliminate them from every place is also a mistake.
I don't think they are here yet, but they will come.
People will get "starter" projects that they can tweak themselves, and that come with AI instructions for development.
Imagine wanting to create a high quality RPG game. You could spend days prompting and hundreds of dollars in tokens, or you can buy a "RPG starter kit" that contains all the systems already impmemented and tested and markdown files on how the AI can add features, test, deploy, etc.
I noticed the figures seemed odd. The causes of female mortality are just plain wrong. The top two causes of female death post-puberty were domestic violence and childbirth related. Neither are listed in the "top mortality" table.
I’d guess comparable for a 30-seat regional, you’d probably want to compare with a PT6, especially since this aircraft is prop driven. That’s only about 250lb dry.
I'm sorry. This is crazy.
And another funny thing is that update and restart button never works for me normally. You press and app never restarts on their own. You have to start it manually. And it's for both, codex and claude app.
We are doomed
Though what has a program that is really really good at edge detection have to do with AGI? The community just spent decades to perfect edge detection. That's great! But let your edge detector try to fry an egg and then tell me again that it's AGI.
If anything, it was a bit of a chore while keeping in mind that chores aren't necessarily a bad thing, e.g. tidying your kitchen after a meal is a chore, but it's satisfying to complete the chore as the alternative is not only a messy looking kitchen, but the hygiene issues which come with it. It's just something which needed to be done.
The once off nature, scope and priority were so minor that it wasn't worth the hassle of actually paying, but if free wasn't an option we would have either used my Claude sub or she would have just paid, no big deal.
Yes, it's realistic. We're at least a couple of generations into this experiment now. Millions of people travel to and from an office to sit on a chair, doing nothing, all day, every day. This in turns keeps a whole bunch of people employed servicing their cars, preparing their food, sweeping the floor behind them etc.
None of these people question whether their jobs are really necessary for the few things we really need: food, shelter, warmth, health etc.
A couple of generations ago most women were employed in the least bullshit job of all: running a household. But now they're all wage slaves too. So yeah, it does work.
I think it's the other way around. Without the cultural norms around impersonal markets, you have to rely on your extended family network or clan for everything, because there is no trust otherwise. This is what keeps you from traveling. If you were trying to trade with a far-away stranger, why should they not just rob you instead? Nobody is around to punish. And for all they know, you were just as likely trying to poison them rather than make a fair trade.
I don't have a sufficient understanding of how North Korea to assess that - too much my information about North Korea is propogandistic sound bites. I do know they have had famines in decades past, and don't think they have them now, so that suggests their economic/industrial strategies are a least passing a minimum threshold of being connected to reality.
My philosophical take is that there are different types of coders, the ones who did it because they wanted to see their design be implemented and those who love the technical puzzle (with obvious overlap). The technical puzzle is taking a hit currently, but I think it will still exist in some form; the designer trying to get something implemented still loves the design work primarily which is sorely lacking in current LLMs, but if they don't have enough technical knowledge they will still get slapped in the face by technical gaps and bugs that LLMs make.
For corporate stuff, I think bureaucracy and issues with churn reduce the effectiveness of using an LLM because the most effective way might be anathema to corporate fiefdoms and structure. The churn is a problem for everyone though...