Up until I read "AI servers" I honestly thought the headline would say "workers," which triggered a secondary thought: "At least it's better treatment than Amazon warehouse workers..."
That's why executives are pushing for LLMs everywhere in businesses: to ensure the floor goes up for everyone. A few productive stars who don't alter the expectations baseline for everyone. That way, all need to work harder, so the execs get to pocket the benefits.
Whether AI actually makes people more productive is irrelevant: you just declare that people need to do more for the same amount of money and in the same amount of time, and employees have to scramble. Just dangle that carrot a little further out so the donkeys work harder.
Most people I know who are bombarded by worthless updates every minute either ignore them but don't bother to disable any or are glued to their phones anyway, so they are beyond help.
I suppose for people crippled by a traumatic memory it would be beneficial though I'm not sure if that could truly wipe it from your mind with all associated emotions and thoughts. That's why they acknowledge that in the article and suggest modifying emotions or the intensity thereof instead.
Looks and sounds interesting... Is there anything beyond glue that makes the Qwen models it uses better for development than what you get with local models through Ollama in an IDE or editor of your choice?
The fact that management signed off on measuring AI use through token usage shows how incompetent management really is, including in allegedly technical conmpanies like Amazon. Tokenmaxxing was an entirely expected and rational response. IOW You measure employees in stupid ways, you're going to get stupid behaviour as a consequence.
Interesting... because the moment I know I'm talking to a chatbot in some company's user support channel I get really impatient with delays, thinking: "It's an AI, it doesn't have to waste my time by pretending to think or type." And I immediately demand to speak to a human.
It's pretty common unfortunately. Debunking AI-generated nonsense takes an order of magnitude more effort, so you really have three choices:
1. Accept that you'll spend most of your days finding issues that will get you labelled an AI critic, which means you'll be last in line for promotions, regardless of your contributions.
2. Ignore your integrity: fight slop with more slop. It's mostly what managers in such places are doing anyway.
3. Leave.
The third option is risky because a lot of places are copying the AI mantras from everyone else. Large companies do tend to have less original thinking at the top, so expect more parroting from execs.
Exactly that. I don't want lots of subscriptions. Zed with OpenRouter sounds all right except it'll be much more expensive than a subscription, I fear.
Guess I'll be looking for a replacement for Cursor now...
Anyone have recommendations? I like the plan/agent mode and the fact that it's an IDE, so I can use it in the traditional way as well as by yapping with a bunch of agents. Also the Cursor rules I've curated and they do their job well.
A pure Clojure stack is extremely rare in most organizations. And integrating data from microservices with data lakes and observability platforms is not "SDKs of the month" but a normal business concern.
What I am trying to say is that immutable state may be one aspect of something much larger that did not factor into Nubank's original decision to use Clojure for microservices. It may have clear benefits there (and in your case - I don't deny that), but downstream you pay for that rarity by having to build every integration yourself.
And consequently the company needs to continue building its own adapters and SDKs to use existing commercial and open-source solutions (e.g. in data and observability), because Clojure and Datomic are almost never supported out of the box by any tools. That's a cost added that may not always be justified, because anything related to Clojure and/or Datomic is going to require bespoke integrations.
Not to mention that hiring is a problem because the Clojure market is relatively small. But that's not the reason the language never caught on. Perhaps only a reason companies rarely choose it.