No, but different people code for different reasons, and neither is more or less "wrong."
Some people (usually the ones who tend to like AI) see coding simply as getting a problem solved, and aren't as interested in how it happens.
Others see code as an artform, and a journey to appreciate in itself. For them, knowing that they are using their knowledge and experience to solve problems that not just anyone can, is part of the fun. It gives us a sense of worth and accomplishment, and that's why we like doing it.
To me it's similar to actual art/painting. Of course artists get upset at AI because they don't want their industry to leave them behind and make them feel unnecessary or less special.
But I don't fault the ones who don't think the way I do... it's just a different way of looking at it.
Author here. Setting aside the effort and cost involved in refurbishing the Mac itself, I can assure you this was not a one-prompt project. It required some planning and steering to build something friendly without scope creep. Despite (or because of) the non determinism, there is still an art and science to engineering by prompt.
Just as C and so forth were shortcuts to allow creativity without learning machine language and having to painstakingly manage a memory heap, LLM tools further allow us to manifest creativity.
Best description I heard is that LLMs are like “eyeglasses for the mind.” It levels the playing field for people like me who maybe don’t have time to learn classic Mac C, the retro68k dev environment, how the hell TCP/IP works at a low level, and all that. Maybe in the same way that professionally it’s allowing me to contribute to areas of the codebase that i couldn’t before and vice versa with my colleagues who used to rely on my area of expertise.
While I was certainly proud that I had some slightly unique or scarcer talent before, I don’t feel a need to be a gatekeeper about it in the new world (and I’m not suggesting you are), since I’m able to deliver a ton more value at a higher velocity now. That follows thru to personal projects like this, where I can finally do this kind of project and see results without losing too much of my precious free/family time.
I agree completely. Personally, I think the art of programming was lost the moment we started using human-readable languages.
Some people see coding as simply getting a problem solved, and aren't interested in how the CPU actually does it. Others appreciate the craft of painstakingly arranging machine instructions, understanding every register and every clock cycle, and knowing they're solving problems that not just anyone can.
For us, that's where the sense of worth and accomplishment comes from. Using a high-level language to have a compiler do all the interesting work rather misses the point.
But I don't fault people who use Python, C++, or even assembly. It's just a different way of looking at it.
All this news says is Company A uses internally the resource they sell externally at ($X) value. It's not saying how much it cost the company to generate said consumed resource
to spell it out: the implicit claim is "ai companies think ai is a scam, as evidenced by them using humans instead of ai", and I believe the huge internal ai use is evidence to the contrary
Anthropic 10x'd its employees over the past 3 years. Shouldn't it be cutting employees if that's the case? Especially because they probably have access to more powerful models which aren't released to the public yet, probably with fewer restrictions, and don't need to pay the markup for using their own service?
I will keep assuming any news coming from AI companies are a type of corporate propaganda, and that AI companies frequently use their millions of dollars of marketing money to create a narrative to maximize hype and make money.
No, I was trying to say extreme skepticism and extreme distrust. Distrust of everything by default. I guess that would be cynicism. I couldn't find the right word - English isn't my native language after all.
By the way, skepticism means witholding judgement in the absence of evidence, not automatic distrust. Cynics like to (erroneously) call themselves skeptics or realists.
Recursive self-improvement is just around the corner. Any day now they'll be laying off all their employees as their god-like AI makes investors trillions of dollars. /s
You shouldn't be getting downvoted, people should be concerned that a company that's about to hit the valuation that it's at is not exploding in junior hiring and expanding their workforce like prior companies
Popular works regularly mine the (public domain) past. Disney animated movies like Cinderella did so. Seth Grahame-Smith did so with Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. and so on. That is literally the benefit of copyright expiration, that other people can utilize and transform a published work.
Agree. There's some impressively modern looking output, however. Quite elegant. Seems like a relevant place to repeat a quote I collected:
There was a romantic tradition, in this country at least, of the drifter Typesetters, who were good enough at the craft to find work wherever they traveled. They'd work in one town until they wanted a change and then drift on. They had a reputation for being well read, occasionally hard drinking, strong union men who enjoyed an independence particularly rare in the 19th century. - Clark E. Coffee (founder of Graphion, a phototypesetting company in SF)
If someone took a close-up photo of a statue's stone texture, I don't see any problem with someone editing the photo and selling it as part of a texture pack for 3d modeling. I feel like what was done here involved a roughly similar amount of transformation. I agree that the right thing to do is attribute the source, though.
Meeting standards is nothing but a formality, a form to fill. The PhDs and lab staff doing the killing, if they have any qualms about the act itself or just the purpose of the killing, generally justify it away as being what they have to do to keep the job. The "humane" killing methods are learned on the job through trial and error, and such errors keep happening regularly to experienced staff.
Prior to lockdowns, many/most lab animals just got killed: interesting quality of life standard.
What's written in lab policies is not at all how it happens in reality.
reply