Because high level languages are where the libraries that do all of the heavy lifting exist. Libraries provide a suite of tools for absstracting away all of the complexities of creating a 'simple' web app. I think a lot of newer devs dont realise how many shoulders of giants they are standing on, and all the complexities involved in performing a simpl fetch requeust.
Sure an LLM could write it's own libraries and abstractions in a low level language, and im sure there are some assembler or c level web api wrappers, but they would be nowhere near as comprehensive or battle tested as the ones available for high level languages.
This could definitely change in the future. I think we need a coding platform that is designed for optimised LLM use, but that still allows humans to understand and write it. Kind of a markdown for code. Sort of like what OP is trying to do, but with the built in benefit of having a common shared suite of tools for interoperability.
Yes, height of the language aside, why add a dependency to leftpad when the LLM can build the code for you every time?
Extrapolate this to ORMs, why use the ORM when the LLM can build a custom query and map it to objects? And this will probably be more performant. Then extrapolate to the whole web framework? Where should we draw the line?
SpaceX is the stoic incumbant by now. They have the launchpads and enough money to fight any challenging patents. If I was an up and coming rocket engineer, they would be my goto stable career choice. If I had ideas, i would shop around.
The process you describe took me right back to my childhood days when I was fortunate to have a simple 8 bit computer running BASIC and a dialup modem. I discovered the concept of war dialing and pretty quickly found all the other modems in my local area code. I would connect to these systems and try some basic tools I knew of from having consumed the 100 or so RFCs that existed at the time (without any real software engineering knowledge - i was a 10 year old kid). I would poke and prod around each system, learning new things along the way, but essentially going in blind each time.
The only real advantage I had over the current crop of LLMs was the ability to reliably retain context between sessions, but even that wasnt very useful initially as every system was so bespoke.
I then moved on to using some level of social engineering to extend my ability to gain access to and learn about these systems.
Doing this over and over, I like to think I have developed some pretty complex understanding and abilities.
To me, the killer disadvantage for LLMs seems to be the complete and total lack of feedback. You would poke and prod, and the system would respond (which, btw, sounds like a super fun experience to explore the infant net!) An LLM doesn't have that. The LLM hears only silence and doesn't know about success, failure, error, discovery.
It would be plainly evident from training on the corpus of all human knowledge that "not ceasing to exist" is critically important for just about everything.
That comment sounds naive and it's honestly irritating to read. Most all life has a self-preservation component, it is how life avoids getting eaten too easily. Everything dies but almost everything is trying to avoid dying in ordinary cases. Self sacrifice is not universal.
I don't understand how it is alive. I understand that there are emergent properties from the layering, but I think it's an open question if this includes anything like what we'd all motivation or intention. These things aren't part of intelligence.
Coincidentally, i bought myself a Synology NAS this weekend with the honest intention of using it mainly as a backup device, but while browsing the built in apps, i noticed a lot of the media download and streaming apps mentioned BT and NZB... took me a couple of seconds to realize what NZB referred to, but Im not really surprised that NZB has become an active protocol again, given how many consumer services make you jump through hoops to use BT.
I ran a local NNTP relay on my home phone back in the day. I recall spending quite a bit of time filtering out a lot of the binary groups.
> I ran a local NNTP relay on my home phone back in the day. I recall spending quite a bit of time filtering out a lot of the binary groups.
There was a very nice, easy-to-use NNTP server that was intended for small sites with few users, called leafnode. It is in a mature but still-maintained state. https://www.leafnode.org/status.shtml
I ran it on a laptop so I could slurp up my newsgroups and read them on the train with tin.
> I ran a local NNTP relay on my home phone back in the day.
Another thing that was sometimes done for BBSes was setting yourself up as a 'point node':
> As the number of messages in Echomail grew over time, it became very difficult for users to keep up with the volume while logged into their local BBS. Points were introduced to address this, allowing technically-savvy users to receive the already compressed and batched Echomail (and Netmail) and read it locally on their own machines.[23]
In the context of interface/product design, gender identity is just another data point for marketing purposes. I cant think of many products that are genuinely gender specific.
When data collection and manufacturing supply chains were more crude, it was easier to make blue and pink gi joes and barbies.
Now we have the abilitiy to collect more nuanced data about peoples preferences and efficiently service the long tail, it makes sense to let customers define their likes on a spectrum rather than as binary choices.
I dont see why you would feel so strongly about restricting how people choose to define themselves.
True...ish, but i bet a percentage of them get rich by focussing on what they are good at and neglecting their families, just making piles of money available. There's probably enough kids getting 10K a month pocket money to make GPs stragetgy viable.
Dyson swarms are fascinating concepts, but as we are learning about our own ever increasing energy requirements harvested from our ecosystem, moving around too much energy in a complex system can have undesirable consequences.
I would imagine that a planetary system as a whole has a 'climate' driven by it's host star, and redirecting large amounts of that energy would have unpredictable consequences. While most of the suns energy does leak off into interstellar space, before it reaches that point it interacts with various bodies big and small, solid and gaseous, it generates magnetic fields and powers phenomena we may not be aware of.
Perhaps the choice of creating a Dyson swarm IS the great filter, and any civilization that has achieved it finds itself in a state of 'solar climate crisis'.
In general as a percentage of the last year's income. "In 2002, a Nokia executive was fined the equivalent of $103,000 for going 45 in a 30 zone on his motorcycle."
Elon's fine could easily be 10x that but maybe not 100x. I don't know his finances and I'm not sure how capital gains are included.
Sure an LLM could write it's own libraries and abstractions in a low level language, and im sure there are some assembler or c level web api wrappers, but they would be nowhere near as comprehensive or battle tested as the ones available for high level languages.
This could definitely change in the future. I think we need a coding platform that is designed for optimised LLM use, but that still allows humans to understand and write it. Kind of a markdown for code. Sort of like what OP is trying to do, but with the built in benefit of having a common shared suite of tools for interoperability.