tossandthrow

Unless you are only trying to satisfy your own desires, you are likely not winning over the Ai, also not in judgement.

A characterization of a business is to satisfy as much desire as cheaply as possible.

Ai,and in the not so distant future embodied Ai, will likely outdo humans if left unchecked.

Even in areas such as providing companionship, sex, etc.

You don't appear to have actually read the comment?

Historically, we make systems to make these decisions - build a method to sort potatoes. Or build a method that can build a method to sort potatoes.

Ai, as a cognitive technology, has the potential to climb that hierarchy.

Yes, current software developers need to make more decisions now. But that is just until the methodologies settle.

Then it is over.

A compiler does not transalte specs to code.

Specs are denotational by nature.

A program could synthesize a program that adheres to the specs. But that is not what we understand by a compiler that generally has to preserve operational semantics.

These types of tests are kind of moot as agentic harnesses are taking over.

IMHO an Ai is the llm plus it's harness.

A good harness would allow the llm to investigate on a map.

Just like the llm can use a python script to figure out how many r's there are in strawberry.

These tests are simply not that predictable of performance of the llm.

IMHO it is prudent to allocate a bit more conservatively these days.

I cut out my nasdaq100 and have generally allocated towards ex us

Reducing progress to increasing entropy makes it even more clear that making progress will likely become easier, not harder.

Yes, oil was important back then. Now we can augment with wind, solar, nuclear, etc.

And more technologies will come.

You could argue that there is a capital built up - but even that is difficult as a lot of the knowledge for, eg., building LLMs can not demand rent. Everybody can build their own transformer networks.

To put it another way, the cost per advancement increases.

This is not true when you don't use capital that demands rent. On the contrary, the cost per advancement is actually decreasing as we develop more knowledge.

LLMs are a cognitive technology (as contrasted to a communication technology). And it will help us tremendously manage knowledge such that you can utilize it better decreasing the cost of advancement.

As we advance it becomes more difficult to advance

I don't think this follows.

We have advanced tremendously over the past 200 years, and we are likely going into a time with rapid advancement again.

With advancement, we also develop tools (eg. Llms) that assist advancing.

The opportunity cost of that privilege is still non negligible, even if you (like in Denmark) get paid to do your tuition free degree.

Proton is horrible. Notoriously bad email service.

I ended it after they only sent half my email to my accountant because they would apparently send the server saved draft version, which was not made current when I clicked send.

Sometimes I write angrily to companies. Usually not on the first email (though it can be incredibly formal).

The cases I can remember is bike rental company that didn't want to provide a receipt, airline that didn't want to accept a complaint (by making impossible to understand complaint flows), company that didn't stop stop marketing email after several reports.

So many companies are treating their customers incredibly badly.

This becomes a tax on the companies that does not treat their customers badly.

Bad customer behavior is a cost of doing business - and I honestly understand why customers are coming out hard.

I'd say that smart phones are a bigger problem than porn.

If you are in the category that would sit and watch porn in the public, then you already wouldn't need birth control.

What benefits does a baby hold? Can a baby freely open a bank account, start a company, get married?

A baby has the benefit of being attended their basic needs. Just like Ai is also being fed power.

Again, you are reading a conclusion into the blog post that was never stated.

The only stated thing was that the author changed their mind slightly about AI.

There are no general conclusion that you so eagerly are trying to dismiss.

What is the general conclusion that you don't think follow?

That the author changed their personal opinion and became more optimistic?

I think you are reading things into the blog post that is not written.

It is not like they conclude that prompt injection can not happen. Actually the opposite is directly written.

That does not seem to be related to llms? It is more about the harness that utilizes them, right?

I use Ai to remove large amounts of code from our code base. Do refactorings that would not have made business sense before.

I also use Ai to be more ambitious. Online evaluation for our in app flows instead of offline.

So for us the entire quality of the product has been increased a lot.

The question is what higher level skills there will be to focus on?

I am not convinced that there are tasks, like project management or architecture, that the Ai is inherently worse at.

Project planning is not more abstraction - a lot of companies use junior staff as project managers. And sure, they will also find a hard time finding jobs, unless they can move up the hierachy.

Yes, so when a tool is walking any monkey through a process, it does bit have a value anymore.

This is why people stopped adding word, excel and googling skills into their resumes - it is assumed that you know how to use the office suite and a browser.

Replace Fable with Opus 4.8, 4.7, or 4.6 - and it is still true

Sure they do - there are a lot of people who thrive working with concrete technologies and solve relatively straight forward issues (implement this component - style work).

These people will see a brutal job market that is forcing them to take more responsibility and work at a higher level of abstraction.

This is nothing new - A bunch of people simply don't thrive well as knowledge workers. The bar for being a knowledge worker is going to go up - by a lot.

You are on point: The developers of the future need to hold much more of the domain that is being developed for. It is not a job to write JSX and tailwind classes anymore, so you need to move up in abstraction - and complexity.

Not all can do that.

Quite a few developers will likely loose their jobs. In particular the ones who don't have mental capacity to work with models - the ones who are forever junior.

The engineers who can manage large scale projects using agents will, on the other hand, probably get a hefty salary bump.

Given how I can manage and develop a huge production code base with an incredibly small team - and the rest of the industry apparently is not able to do it - I deem that we are still in the very early days.

There is this over indexing in training data that I find quite problematic.

I have really good results getting LLMs to read documentation and work of these. This is in domains probably sparsely represented in the training data.

I can recommend reading section 2 of the paper.

The goal was not to define unsolved problems.

But as such, the problems are also not previously published problems.

This seems quite reasonable IMHO.

Yes, you are pointing out exactly how HA is difficult.

There is a whole slew of downstream things you need to take into consideration.

Sure, why not?