jonplackett

There’s an article from yesterday I think it was stratchery where they say it’s also because the Chinese open source models are better because they don’t have to play by the no-distilling rules that the western models have to honour.

I just gave the day dream / pay bills image to ChatGPT and Gemini pro and they both could only tell me the pay bills text (shown with the thin lines)

If you push that ditch analogy though. Yeah we no longer dig ditches manually - but we also then all got overweight and weak because people aren’t doing any physical labour anymore. (Most people anyway)

And diggers absolutely do have a monopoly on digging ditches now.

I don’t see how someone learning to code now will ever be as good at coding as someone who learned before LLMs.

Just like right now no-one is gonna get better at digging ditches than people were before diggers - it just doesn’t make sense for someone to put the time and effort into that.

The thing is - is it a self fulfilling prophecy?

We already know junior hiring an are down. And how many people are now excited to learn to code compared to 5years ago?

How many of those excited people are ACTUALLY learning to code and not just learning to prompt?

LLMs/agents will take over (or at least dominate) software dev even if they don’t get any better because humans will just get old and there’ll be no new humans who know how to do it.

Prediction: in 2027 a coding agent will read this as inspiration for why it should code.

What is the car’s reaction if you just block the camera. Will it still drive?

What do you think is the answer then? Why does it think that?

I just thought it’s interesting that it constantly uses that as a justification but they don’t explain where that justification comes from.

Question: how does Fable _know_ it’s ‘just a simulation’?

Is that specified or does it always just assume it isn’t really being put in charge of things for real?

We got another 6 months, meatbags.

This reminds me of ‘The Jules Test’. Popularised (hyper locally) by my friend Jules.

When renting a flat, simply head straight to the bathroom and flush the toilet. If the toilet flush is good, the flat is fine.

Someone explain how the HN algorithm has put this on the front page

Yeah, I was waiting for the punchline, but it never came

So many websites are like this. Amazon is one of them - why make it so hard to zoom in on an image?

Ok so have you just accepted that you don’t know what any of the internals of the software do anymore?

Do you go try work it out later, or do you just accept that this isn’t what software development means anymore?

Do you have to send your code anywhere where someone else is going to look at it and judge you based on it?

I thought this was how everyone who can actually code uses AI for anything that’s actually important.

Am I wrong? Are you guys just YOLOing everything these days?

Wanna come do my monthly deep clean?

$8000 up front + $100 a month

Assuming it lasts maybe 4 years that’s $61 a week.

So you could just hire a human cleaner to come once a week and have them do a way better job.

Or if you prefer to compare to the subscription price of $450 a month you can now have your human cleaner come twice a week

Bearing in mind even competent human cleaners often do a mediocre job tidying up I cannot possibly see how this robot could even begin to be useful.

Businesses don’t care how much sun you get

Seems to be mostly full of people hurling racist abuse - this should surprise no one.

It’s funny that at just the phrase ‘Long Wave’ my mind jumps back the “long wave radio Atlantic 252”.

I miss the days of jingles.

Wouldn’t that just help the American labs anyway though? Or do they assume they’ve actually already figured this stuff out and kept it secret?

Yeah agreed. Would be good to know the number of replies at least

Weird that it’s the Neo that is affected why it famously has hardly any ram.

How can there be any moat for AI ever, if you can just steal a model by talking to it?

This is actually a great answer

I thought the whole point was that it doesn’t need to be pointed at the problem. That’s a much easier problem to solve. Also you eliminate 10000 false positives.

No MacOS support (cry emoji)

I think you’re missing the point

Am I the only one that stared at the photo at the top for 3 minutes trying to see three trees in the photo because I thought it was a post about optical illusions? No, oh ok.