Honestly, I would argue about the complexity of it. The discord API is straightforward, and what you’re describing doesn’t sound that complicated.

And we have seen fairly complex stuff that AI did, but if it does pull it off somehow, the next question is quality.

I just read a bit of AI code a few minutes ago, and it didn’t take long to step over a chain of if / else if statements where only the first if statement if reachable, the rest is not. The code should’ve been one if statement followed by a match statement. Not sure why the LLM thought “combine” two logically completely separate statements into one. And that was in 1.5kloc it generated, so not much. There’s probably even more, I just read a fraction of it.

Honestly, I think what you consider „good code“ is just shifted from what the previous commenter considers „good code“. Prompting is about giving enough information so the AI can solve the task without needing to reconstruct a lot of context. Most people using AI somewhat regularly will have figured out to write good enough prompts. I‘ve never seen AI generate perfectly good code beyond hello world and the fibonacci sequence. And by perfectly good I mean I wouldn’t change beyond 30% of what it produces, which is not a high bar.

You could’ve literally learned programming…

Personally, I feel that over time this becomes less of a problem. It was very annoying for me as well, but as you get used to the language and the ecosystem, you get better at it and you will need less rebuilds to incorporate something into your config. And if it’s only every couple of days, then I am completely fine with waiting 10-30 seconds for the rebuild.

If I’m trying to brute-force my way through something I usually continue to look for the next possible solution while the system is rebuilding, so it doesn’t feel like time-loss to me.

.cc and .hh feels the most serious.

Yeah, if you can write modern C++, than Rust is going to feel much more natural and easy.

That’s true. I have a MacBook as well (M1, gift from a couple of years ago) and I don’t use it. Okay it’s fast, but what I do on a laptop doesn’t need that power at all. Battery life is very valid (which is a problem with my old ThinkPad), but with Framework catching up, it’s less of an argument in the future.

And I honestly don’t feel much of a difference when using my MacBook compared to my ThinkPad in terms of performance (and my ThinkPad has 2 cores and 4 threads mind you), but I mostly just browse and do C programming (I know that there is a massive difference in power, I just don’t need it in day to day use). For everything that needs a lot power I use my desktop computer.

In the end it just comes down to priorities I suppose. For me personally, privacy has become one of the most important concerns because I think it’s fucked up how much companies are allowed to know about us individually, and I don’t want them to keep getting information about me.

No battery life, no ARM processor, no retina display, no broken glass design and no other gimmick I don’t really need can justify what they are doing, at least in my opinion. I‘d rather need to inconveniently charge my laptop every 2 hours because the battery is dead then to have some company know more about myself then I do.

By definition, that in itself isn’t gatekeeping. And I personally wouldn’t feel gatekept, just excluded. In the article the author evaluates the usefulness of AI for a field which they admit to have no clue about. And it reads like that AI gives you the knowledge of that field, just 3 seconds away, and everyone is obsolete now, which isn’t true. While it can give you the knowledge, you still need the understanding, and understanding is what makes people good at something, not knowledge in itself. I don’t understand your argument. The situation you described is not what I‘ve been talking about.

1. It‘s not about making friends
2. It‘s about factual discussions
3. It‘s about people trying to contribute to those discussions with arguments they can’t reason about, which normally isn’t particularly helpful, and if someone acts like a knowledgeable dick, then I don’t feel bad excluding them at all

You have it plain sight. Refusing to engage with someone is not gatekeeping. Your definition pretty much aligns with what I said.

And if someone doesn’t have any idea what they’re talking about, then maybe they shouldn’t take part in the talking. You can’t tell me that you‘ll take cybersecurity advice from someone who saw a movie about hacking.

Which doesn’t mean that clueless people have nothing of value to add, but it’s unlikely (especially in highly factual discussions).

No one can tell whether AGI in the form of something akin to biological brains will happen. How will we build something we can’t comprehend the architecture of?

Also, I think their point was not that AGI will never happen, it’s more that it doesn’t matter whether it happens or not, because AI/AGI will not solve our problems (well, it will solve some, but create so many more that in the end we’ve really achieved nothing).

I think we are further from AGI than people think. I doubt I will live to see it.

That’s not gatekeeping, but okay. Gatekeeping is about withholding knowledge & information from a group of people for a personal benefit. It’s not gatekeeping to stop every clueless idiot from blurting out their opinion and expecting everyone to respect it, because otherwise you’re a gatekeeper (I don’t want to imply the author of the article is a clueless idiot, this is a generalized statement).

I honestly don’t understand what people even like about Apple. They aren’t privacy focused at all. They still collect a lot of personalized data about you. And even if it’s not as much as google, still doesn’t make it good, just makes it less bad. And they store it securely somewhere on a “trust me bro” basis, promising to not tell anyone else.

Apart from that: Apple is trying everything to avoid you realizing that you’re using a computer. Personally, I find IT experts using apple computers to be contradictory of some sorts, because of apple’s attempt at hiding the actual computer from you.

I understand that having a 1kg metal frame in front of you feels great & premium, but that can’t seriously be one of the major selling points…

If you’re using flakes: nix flake update && sudo nixos-rebuild switch —flake .# in the directory of your flake.nix

That’s one of the dumbest articles I‘ve ever read. Glad the author realized it themselves.

If you ask me personally, I don’t think that any of this has a benefit for anyone. I don’t think this is an advancement. It doesn’t make us work less, it just makes us achieve more in the same amount of time, or at least most people feel that way. It doesn’t make me more productive, it’s rather the opposite.

And what good is it to us if we achieve more? The only benefit it has is for those god damned capitalists. Great for them. The pay we get stays the same, and it probably even gets less.

OpenClaw? Why the fuck would I let an AI use my computer? I want to use my computer. I want to read my emails and I want to answer them. I want to research stuff and I want to learn. Why would I let an AI do all of those things? Hire a human because AI can’t touch grass? Seriously?

It‘s all just so gimmicky, and yes it’s interesting and amazing that those things are possible, but it’s like flying humans to mars, it is really cool? Yeah. Will it have any real benefit? No.

To me, this is all just fucking sad and will probably mark the advancement from late capitalism stage into hopefully complete economic chaos.

So yeah, when it comes to AI, I‘m probably not the best one to ask.

But what they’re also implying is is that most people just can’t keep up. But they can, apparently.

About the security stuff, I don’t think it is a question of whether AI could do it or couldn’t do it, it just wasn’t extensively used for it. For a long time there have been LLM bots trying to automatically identify security vulnerabilities in hopes of making “free money”, but it wasn’t effective. Now there’s people actually trying to find real issues. And I would argue that AI is not good at it. You can just let it ponder for as long as you can feed it with money, and you will definitely find vulnerabilities. The false-positive rate is very likely high. If I try to roll a dice 12 times, and 3 out of those were 6, then that doesn’t make me a good dice roller.

I think it’s just more the act of discovering what we can do with AI. It’s like openclaw, that could’ve been around last year, it’s not like AI wasn’t capable enough at that point, it’s just that no-one thought of using it like that (or at least no-one built it to the extent of openclaw and got it that popular).

Not even every bug AI finds is a bug.

But then you’re primarily extracting text, which you don’t need LLMs for. OCR tools will do the job much cheaper and more effective.

That problem isn’t even specific to computer science, it’s specific to most engineering fields. Programmers are just extremely good at automating, so they automate themselves out of existence.

At least in Germany, people with higher-education on-average also have more political awareness - but the more engineering their field contains, the more that awareness jumps out of the window (what I mean by that is that of all the people with higher-education, engineers have the highest rate of politically right-leaning people, which in my world-view equates to being incompetent).

Which imo comes from another problem: Computer Science had a huge boom, and now we ended up with a lot of businessmen who can hussle 70h/week to get their degree in 4 semesters, so that they can start their path to their first million. Basically, computer science got invaded by capitalists and the nerds just went to another corner in hopes not to be bothered. Not that they could have done much about it, there are way more capitalists than there are computer nerds.

Try to optimize this away, sucker:

echo "level full-speed" | sudo tee /proc/acpi/ibm/fan