repelsteeltje

But that would simply result in Most Americans don't want AI Data Centers, which isn't the same as NYMBYism. I think many Americans see the benefits of having access to unicorn farts and may even support having more data centers. Just not in my backyard, thank you.

(Ftr. the article doesn't have an opinion on whether Americans like AI, just my take.)

The ambiguity of the word "Open" has a long history. Going back to at least late 1980s, when X Window "skin" OPEN LOOK (by AT&T - Sun consortium) had license issues and Open Source Foundation started work on OSF Motif.

That would be truly ironic: companies get big harvesting any data with questionable copyright implications, then hide behind DMCA if access to the harvest is used "inappropriately".

[...] would be protected from the market.

One might step back and ask: why would a well funded company with free mining access to all the information in the world need to be protected from the market, if the market suggest less money and resources are sufficient?

Something something cathedral / bazaar? Communism / capitalism? Control / anarchy?

Sample accurate editing is with AAC is a pain though. Especially if you also have video, because frame rates are usually incompatible.

If you want flexibility without fully transcoding both audio and video, Opus is your friend

Why not use a lossless codec if you care about quality? Or use Opus, descent for specht and works pretty much anywhere these days.

The correlation between job cuts and ai growth is real. But it's related more to ai cost than ai performance. Especially in Oracle's highly leveraged case.

Etymologically you're correct that semites refers to [all] people from middle east and horn of Africa. But the label is from the European perspective, where it was used to refer to Jews. I'm sure that if they'd had a say in it, they would not have referred to themselves as Jews.

But yeah, there is indeed some irony in the term "antisemitism" in the context you describe

Sorry, but to me an LLM is nothing but a tool. It is not a replacement for my expertise and it is definitely not something to outsource my thinking to.

Great on you, that's indeed how LLMs should be used, proper. But if anything, the article demonstrates someone is trying to outsource thinking to an AI agent.

I agree that's fine in that at least it's doesn't cause unmaintainable garbage. And might even get you up to speed quicker that reading the docs old school.

But the GP point, that you're better off finding people that already, truly understand and are familiar with the tech (ie. Astro), imo still stands.

You mean, use encryption (+base64 or something) as a "poor man's" string-escape? Interesting idea!

There will always be cases (like audio processing, car brakes, pace makers) where hard real-time constraints prohibit GC languages (as well as l1 cache, instruction reordering and other optimizations). Also, consider that Python's performance frequently originates in it's bindings to libraries written in C, C++, Fortran, Rust.

I recently ran a few Java benchmarks and found that an array holding a bunch of objects incurred approx 3x the number of bytes compared to the expected number based on underlying class data structure. With current RAM prices, that is something to consider if you're building software that's meant to scale. Mileage may vary, but I expect JavaScript or Python will be similar.

So, sure. There is a case to be made that ergonomics and dev velocity. And premature micro optimizations might take your focus away from good systems architecture. But I've frequently found the need to peal of leaky abstractions and having to understand and be savvy at low level stuff too. Nothing wrong with studying the guts of a C64 or Amiga, today.

Python, Java or TypeScript are good educational tools, but you'd be doing yourself a disservice if you'd confine yourself to them without understanding computers.

Interesting. I'm know nothing about Apple, but maybe you can explain how idiomatic Swift handles Blobs and how that interfaces with C or C++ around void ptrs, std::spans etc.?

There is a difference between UB in C, and something being undefined in some version of Microsoft C on Windows.

Many of C's UB is specifically, intentionally left undefined in the standard to express code that relies on some specific way it is handled, is not proper, portable C. Indeed, the DWORD-sized memory access being atomic doesn't apply to MS Windows prior to version 3.0 running on a 80286.

It's UB because the ISO C spec says it's UB.

+1

And SAL annotations aren't even C++ proper.

I don't think the cloud (someone else's computer) is the best solution. The sanitation problem can be mitigated by compartimentization but the cloud aspect also adds brittleness and new attack vectors.

Why not set up proper containers (or VMs) locally? And why not wait a little till local LLMs catch up?

Maybe just a personal itch, but having your dev environment elsewhere feels so gross to me..

Would that mean the original owner gets it back? Would they have to pay property tax backlog retroactively? Might be huge..

Hadn't thought of that and I think you're right.

Having been exposed to Java < 5 (before generics) Arrays felt somewhat like JavaScript or PHP3. It's a lot more ergonomic today.

But there are still many remnants (like null refs, despite Option<>) that are easiest understood by tracing back Java's historical roots.

Haven't yet used Zig in anger, but it looks more like a successor to C (with a bit of Go), whereas Rust is a successor to C++, first and foremost.

Distopian, what an insightful frame

There is more to math, than input (money) and output (power). Sure, there is some relation between applied sciences and how knowlegde can assist effecting world events.

But for the most part, math discovery relied more on human curiosity than on resources to "do math". Conversely, if people allocate lots of money to developing AI, that doesn't mean mathematicians have an obligation to take the money provide ROI to investors.

That might change the odds, but unless you fork diligently (and monkeypatch each and every future vulnerability) you might ship a compromised fork forever.

That sounds terrible! Feels like your LLM agent probably has more control over your computer than you. Can't imagine being confined to a prison like that, but I suppose there are other aspects (monetary or otherwise) of the job that make up?

Precisely. There is nothing preventing you from doing the same in Linux: rather than installing docker, install docker on a Linux VM (ie. using KVM).

Conversely, docker containers don't actually exist on MacOs. Docker desktop is merely a way to emulate docker on apple hardware.

An economy that doesn’t need human labor is a political crisis of a kind democratic systems have never faced.

This isn't entirely accurate. I can think of Norway as an example of a small economy that after discovery of large gas and oil repositories managed to responsibly invest and distribute wealth across it's populous.

But I admit it's going to be hard to do the same at world scale and at speed

Yes. Great news, for now.

Trust is hard to gain, but easy to lose.

That's also true

Well, at least the way he handless the typewriter and scribbles seems somewhat performative. If it's just a draft version, he seems capable of handling the typing hammers very professionally, adding online corrections staying within margins.

Seems way more seasoned in typing, than most typist of those days. And yet, he can't find the time or patience to retype the piece without typos as a final version?

I don't know the man and don't doubt his sincerity. I even agree with most of what he's saying. But it's pretty obvious imo that this is all somewhat performative.

Yes. And indeed, abstraction is not what LLMs are offering.

Ahhh in yes, that makes sense. I get it now