ttoinou

Do we have proven (or probable) case of USA industrial espionage ?

Because they got caught

there is much less intellectual property in China so it’s not ‘theft’ (as you can’t put property on information)

No True Scotsman

   "This isn't objective." Correct, and we are not pretending it is. We are not handing down a scientific verdict. 

If you write too many preconditions, postconditions, invariants etc. Then you cement your software and you will spend most of your time on the tests rather than on the actual useful software

Oh I do that naturally as my rational problem investigation. Sometimes you can’t write a test for that, you need to test it yourself

There is a whole religion about tests that is worth attacking though

I’m in the same boat, I don’t like Finder (better than Windows Explorer though), nor do I like default macOS files / folders dialogs, and I really dislike drag and drop behavior on macOS

I dont understand why we are stuck in stone’s age with filesystems GUI

Can you really calculate the cost easily ? Given most of it should be reduced by input caching read (if you don’t want to have a crazy bill)

What if your junior is contacted by a three letter agency ? He will be legally forced in the USA to follow their direction and not your instruction.

LLM are so powerful exactly because they can interpret unstructured inputs in so many ways, prompt injection is a feature not a bug

If it's prototypes or throwaway scripts, then it's fine and it's still valuable experience

With AI LLM, the power of smart copy pasting is now also in the hands of non-geeky people. And also more senior developers can spin up and manage dozens of juniors via agentic AI

Juniors now need to be more skilled than before

Difficult truth, but that’s the truth we need to accept

Anecdotally I hired a junior and it was a net loss

Lots of software engineers were just stack overflow copy pasters. No offense, it’s also a good way to learn, I’ve also done my fair share of stupid programming, but let’s not pretend the value to humankind was huge there

Ah yes of course, all companies can afford to hire 5 people for one job to smoothen out the loss of information by employee churn

I agree with that, and that’s why it’s better to ask an AI and improve your prompt, instead of hiring a human that will disappear and you will loose all institutional knowledge

Since the luddites at least

I don’t think humans workers should be cogs in the machine, but from my experience unfortunately that’s how people want to be treated. One simple explanation is that there is no freedom / creativity without responsibility, and the latter is extremely expensive in brain resources

Well you could make a REAP with better input prompts on longer context then. It’ll improve the REAP quality

If AI is not beneficial, then those humans could be re-hired soon.

Big companies are always doing bad things, but not because they use AI, because they have legal protections which prevents small companies (which could be anyone like you and me) to compete. The same small companies who could also benefit from using AI.

Automating a job is toxic now ?

Ask a SOTA LLM when Newton was born without any access to internet : the answer is Lossless for our shared culture understanding of this question. Not Near-lossless, lossless. Ask the same LLM when YOU were born, the answer is just wrong for almost anyone in the world, not lossy. Between the two there is a whole new field of Lossyness to study.

90% depends entirely on what the measure means here, do you understand what "Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain at rank 10" means to the set of data that we are comparing ?

Sometimes coming up with new codecs (compressors decompressors) means coming up with new ways to interpret artifacts of the real world. And this is exactly why LLM are so powerful and they are like a giant Lossy (but Near-Lossless for various use cases) ZIP file / Database of the whole knowledge of the training data.

Nobody is trying to manipulate you here, humanity just has to find new explanations for complex topics.

    Lossy-ness is binary

Lossless is objective for information theory. To get from the real world to digital world you need an analog to digital converter, this process is by definition lossy. We are interested in the real world, and information is pure but never represents exactly reality. Lossyness is baked into our problem statement here.

Using terms like near lossless means we think we are very close to reality for what we’re trying to do

Lossless is objective for information theory. To get from the real world to digital world you need an analog to digital converter, this process is by definition lossy. We are interested in the real world, and information is pure but never represents exactly reality.

Lossyness is baked into our problem statement here.

Using terms like near lossless means we think we are very close to reality for what we’re trying to do

Yes, anything not lossless is lossy. Near-lossless is not lossless, so it is lossy. I hope we speak the same language

There is, after you define what you’re ready to loose and understand the lossy space. That’s how we came up with mobile cellphones, audio and video codecs etc. Literally powering all modern devices we use.

It's an open secret the european union has nothing to do with the will of the people

192gb or 256gb of RAM would be enough ! We could run real time large MoE models, REAPed for our usage (e.g. english agentic coding), dynamic quant 2-4bits

So it’s 10x to 3x cheaper…

How about brazilian median software developer wage ?