exactly, as a manager and a sometimes a developer, "vibe-coding" has been looking more and more as my day job (in a good way, it's good to not have to do all the dirty work for your pet projects) and it's all about having the same discipline in term of:

* thinking about the big picture * knowing how you can verify that the code match the big picture.

In both case, somtimes you are happily surprised, sometimes you discover that the things you told 3 times the one writing code to do was still not done.

Engineering is not "dirty work."

Management is not "engineering."

Do you view it as an issue at all that when everyone takes on a more manager-like role, no human remains who has the hands-on experience and understanding of the system?

Thats too vague and drastic, every "show HN" is an ads, for notoriety at least. I would prefer we draw the line at "content pushed by a third party against payment must be displaid only with regard to where it is displaid and must not use information about to whom it is displaid" .

I.e displaying an ads about Sentry on a ads technica page, find . Displaying an ads about hiking equipment on ars techbica because i made a google search abd it is estimated I like that -> not fine. It would kill all the incentive to overtrack the ROI will no more justify the cost.

Show HN isn’t advertising in the sense they are addressing: paying a website for space to promote something. There’s no payment taking place with Show HN. If no payment can be made, websites have to find another revenue model besides advertising, and don’t have an incentive to keep users addicted and endlessly consuming.

Nah, advertisement in general. Just make the internet a paid sub. We don't need influencers or snake oil ads. And without ads and influencers, there is no reason for meta to try to keep people infinitely stuck to their phones. They can get their cut just from a paid sub.

Netflix (even before they introduced ads) optimized for watch time. Higher watch time = higher retention for subscriptions (even when prices go up).

Every website would then become a snake oil salesman for buying their subscription.

It'd be like streaming today. Fragmented, expensive, and useless. And no one would like it.

Beyond that, websites would still need people to be addicted to justify the sub.

And furthermore, "sponsorships" will still occur behind the sub wall.

What was the internet like in the early days before monetization? (Hint: I was there and it was great, albeit slow on dial up =]).

Are we wishcasting here or suggesting realistic policy?

I think the main insight is that the ocean horizon arrives quite fast.

I see, that's why the longest are peak-to-peak

It's a slang for somebody fat. 子 does not carry a specific meaning it is more a character with grammatical function to nominative

Maybe he means that LLM will hit a ceiling glass or that the "right" approach will give equivalent with less training/less intensive compute requirements ?

And the store does not use facial recognition and/or checking id to know if the potential buyer is a kid ? The only (huge) difference for me is the scale of the verification and how data are stored.

> And the store does not use facial recognition and/or checking id to know if the potential buyer is a kid?

They can just not serve cigarettes. In addition I think it's also insane to compare cigarettes, which are purely negative, to free internet usage which is massively net positive.

How does it compare with https://github.com/KoljaB/RealtimeVoiceChat , which is absent of the benchmark ?

That's not a turn-taking model, it's just a silence detection Python script based on whatever text comes out of Whisper...

I haven’t tried that one yet, I’ll check it out.

See the agent as a coworker ssh-ing on your machine, how would you work efficiently ? By working on the same directory ? No

You give each agent a git worktree and if you want to check, you checkout their branch.

I think I know where they're coming from as I used to have a similar wrong model. I thought strength = more muscle cells and endurance = just better heart/lungs to deliver oxygen and clear waste like CO2 and lactic acid.

Turns out muscle fibers mostly grow bigger rather than more numerous, and there are different fiber types (slow-twitch vs fast-twitch) that adapt based on how you train. So for the same muscle, an Ironman runner and a guy doing heavy low-rep squats will develop different fiber characteristics: you can't fully max out both.

I'm simplifying, but learning this changed a lot about how I understand exercise at the biological level.

My understanding is that anabolic steroid are somehow close to what you're thinking about? It's just that as anything taking a simple shortcut , it comes with unwanted effects