randcraw

Or you could just submit a photo of someone else's poodle.

In the late 1960s daily TV news coverage revealed the horrors of war to the American public as never before (just as Brady's photos had done in the Civil War). That palpable gruesomeness was instrumental in the rising tide of unpopularity enjoyed by the war (and Johnson) by the elections of 1968.

Emergency is the mother of making exceptions. During both US gulf wars, the army broke from its long tradition of over-regulating new systems before they could be fielded, especially for small semi-autonomous platforms like flying drones and robots. Entirely new systems as well as major updates to fielded system were routinely prototyped in-country / on-the-battlefield in Iraq and Afghanistan. The demand for new capabilities and fixes was simply too great not to ship ASAP.

I look forward to following this issue. We're at an inflection point in AI adoption where, for some uses, it _must_ be trustworthy. Failure to stick to the facts must doom it for such uses until its wild hair reliably and accountably can be tamed.

I think you would most certainly NOT prefer any Constitution, nor especially any Bill of Rights, that was rewritten by today's version of "We the People".

It’s crazy how much worse Google search results are now than they used to be.

I could not agree more. Each time I do a google search, I feel like I've stepped into a severe reality distortion field. The results are simply WORTHLESS. It's not just that the AI summary at the top answers the wrong question, but the sequence of hits thereafter wander off into the weeds almost immediately. I routinely have to constrain the search in multiple ways (time bounds, specific word rejection, etc) just to get one or two relevant hits.

Frankly, I think I'm going to have to MOVE AWAY FROM GOOGLE to a subscription-based search service just to get any useful search results again.

Present generations see the primary role for AI as being identical to the biggest disruption to US business in the past century — namely the gigantic sucking sound from the outsourcing of millions of US jobs in order to reduce labor costs. Of course they're terrified of it. By singing its praises AND IGNORING THAT CONCERN, Schmidt showed that he couldn't be more out of touch with the top priority of this generation — WILL AI TAKE MY JOB?

It's like Steve Forbes cluelessly joking that rise of Private Equity will make it easier for the unemployed to buy another racehorse. WTF?

I've noticed the same thing. IMO, the heyday of computing coincided with the peak of WiReD Magazine. Around 1995 interconnected computers and the WWW bootstrapped a revolution in spreading+sharing information that seemed certain to reshape cultural norms, organically, bottom up, for the better. It seemed the world would never be the same. Heady times. That sense of optimism lasted until the computer unicorns morphed into monopolies. After that the roles reversed and all us net denizens became unicorn fodder. It's hard to stay upbeat after you realize you're no longer in charge and are constantly being manipulated wherever you go online.

Surely in the long run…

And that's the rub. PE is all about short term ROI at any price. Their business model doesn't take product superiority or brand loyalty into account. If a widget can be made cheaper, you do it, damn the collateral damage.

Yeah, I've seen the same thing happen to data miners in the pharma industry. An increasing fraction of young biologists have skill in basic statistical DM as well as web search proficiency sufficient to gather DM code analysis examples, even without using AI. In the very near future I expect almost all R&D exploratory DM will be done by pharma domain experts (biologists and chemists) rather than served by DM experts (computer scientists or engineers).

Yeah, IEEE Spectrum has responded to the dissimilar roles in SW dev by ranking programming language popularity contextually, by separating the project domains and ranking the languages only within each domain. That's a lot more useful than allowing the single dominant project domain to silence the recessive ones, as TIOBE does.

Rather than coining a new word like adaption, I'd call this acculturation. It's reshaping not only SW dev but natural language too -- how we read and write and how we speak.

Everyone knows that AI-written slop isn't worth actually reading. So when reading mass media content we skim over each paragraph's opening phrases rather than read it deliberately, sentence by sentence. We also do this while writing notes, dropping determiners, acronymming common phrases, and making references to characters/scenes in popular media. Now with the rise of vocal interfaces and ever shorter rounds of engagement, all this abbreviating will only exponentiate.

Yeah, 95% of the available advancement in computing is in people management, not technical mastery. Businesses much prefer to hire externally to serve any non-core capabilities, especially to minimize internal culpability should anything go wrong. That leaves little opportunity to think outside the box technically.

Clothes are a good example of what ails online shopping. When you physically visit a clothing store, you chose it knowing the quality and style of that merchant -- you thereby filter out a huge fraction of the market that you want to exclude from your search.

But online (because the available search criteria are so imprecise) your search brings up every possible form of clothing, especially the stuff that's a commodity (or hyped by major e-merchants) -- cheap, popular with 25 year olds, colorless, largely disposable. It's hopeless unless you yourself are a commodity -- indiscriminating, predictable, and totally average.

And it ignores the fact that, if you refuse to remember any facts because they can be looked up, you'll be unable to form any new ideas because you'll know nothing, and you won't know what is out there to be looked up.

And of course, what if your phone dies?

The more the role of the tool, the less the role of the craftsman.

That coordinated effort also includes the buying up of US media sources by billionaires and gigacorps to control the content of not just news sources and social forums, but every electronic window we have onto the world.

Remember, the panopticon observed people who were in a prison.

So far.

Just as "there is no royal road to mathematics", no AI can do your learning for you. The need for memorization of essential math identities (like multiplication tables and use of fractions) or rules of grammar (like verb conjugation or use of anaphora) will never be enhanced by AI. There is an essential role for good old fashioned rote learning that can't be avoided. To pretend AI will not impede that learning is a fool's errand, literally.

And s/he was right. Most students who were brought up with calculators in math class cannot do basic math without one today. When shopping in groceries, they have no idea if one product costs more than another by weight. They're easy to bamboozle with the simplest misrepresentations of numbers. Is one choice of product really better than another, fractionally, or corrected for a shifted baseline? They don't know and can't use basic algebra to find out.

This is bad -- an F grade for the education system that let them slide by without learning an essential skill. The chinese aren't this lazy. And if we persist in not learning this, America's future will regress to us asking them, "Do you want fries with that?"

According to the article's graph of the fresh grad unemployment rate, the present climate is about as bad as in 2003 but less than a third as bad as it was in 2010. Unemployment during the pandemic spiked well above 2010, but only briefly, before returning to pre-pandemic level.

Krouse points to a great article by Simon Willison who proposes that the killer role for vibe coding (hopefully) will be to make code better and not just faster.

By generating prototypes that are based on different design models each end product can be assessed for specific criteria like code readability, reliability, or fault tolerance and then quickly be revised repeatedly to serve these ends better. No longer would the victory dance of vibe coding be simply "It ran!" or "Look how quickly I built it!".

I abhor small talk. It's physically painful. I've heard that's often true of some cultures, especially northern europeans.

I think the trick to converse on a more engaging level is to introduce conversation that invites deeper thought. Somehow you need to intrigue the other person. Compel them through curiosity to leave their comfort zone and join you where you'd prefer to be.

IMO, even disagreement can be agreeable if it's not confrontational, if you genuinely express curiosity to learn what they think, what they care about.

Unfortunately this article has not been archived. The only content available at archive.is right now is a stub.

I don't think so. A decent C programmer could pretty much imagine how each line of C was translated into assembly, and with certainty, how every byte of data moved through the machine. That's been lost with the rise of higher-level languages, interpreters, their pseudocode, and the explosion of libraries and especially, the rise of cut-and-paste coding. IMO, 90% of today's developers have never thought about how their code connects to the metal. Starting with CS101 in Java, they've always lived entirely within an abstract level of source code. Coding with AI just abstracts that world a couple steps higher, not unlike the way that templates in 4GL languages attempted but failed to achieve, but of course, the abstraction has climbed far beyond that level now. Software craftsmanship has indeed left the building; only the product matters now.

The problem for software artisans is that unlike other handmade craftwork, nobody else ever sees your code. There's no way to differentiate your work from that which is factory-made or LLM-generated.

If fluid intelligence is based on the ability to recognize new patterns (unsupervised learning) and crystallized intelligence on recognizing known patterns (supervised learning), then more than physiology, age alone may differentiate the two.

Youngsters know no patterns so they can't match new events to known ones. Oldsters know that most seemingly new stuff is not really new, it's just the same old stuff, so they reduce the cost of thinking and reject the noise by adding the new unlabeled event to an existing cluster rather than creating a new noisy one. That's wisdom. But that's also a behavior that will inevitably increase as we age and our clusters establish themselves and prove their worth.

So aren't those two forms of intelligence less about a difference in brain physiology and more about having learned to employ common sense?

Intellectually, maybe. But emotionally, let's hope not. I was a major twerp in high school.

More than socio-economic, the chief factor that advances US political candidates is, simply, fame. These days fame is achieved by somehow becoming an outlier: loud extremism, incessant self promotion, and spending truly insane amounts of money. Intelligence of any kind is irrelevant.

At the very least, every school, subject, and teacher should be obliged to conduct experiments during the school year -- A/B/C trials in which various forms of note taking are explored: handwritten, computer-typed, and neither.

Then see how it affects the kids' learning speed and retention of the various subjects. Then they need to compare notes with the other teachers to learn what they did differently and what did or didn't work for them.

Ideally they'd also assess how this worked for different types of students, those with good vs bad reading skills, with good vs bad grades, esp those who are underperforming their potential.