With AI and robotics there may be the slim chance we get closer to that.

But we won't. Not because AI, but because humans, of course.

Ask the LLM to... I don't know, to explain to you the chemistry of aluminium oxides.

Do you really think the average human will even get remotely close to the knowledge an LLM will return to such a simple question?

Ask an LLM to amend a commit. Ask it to initialize a rails project. Have it look at a piece of C code and figure out if there are any off-by-one errors.

Then try the same to a few random people on the street.

If you think the knowledge stored in the LLM weights for any of these questions is that of the average person I don't even know what to say. You must live in some secluded community of savant polymaths.

Theoretically fixable, then.

> But it can’t. Not definitively and consistently

Again, it can't, yet, but with better training data I don't see a fundamental impossibility here. The comparison with any magic wand is, in my opinion, disingenuous.

> If you don’t think to do regular things, you won’t be able to think to do advanced things

Humans already don't think for a myriad of critical jobs. Once expertise is achieved on a particular task, it becomes mostly mechanical.

-

Again, I agree with the original comment I was answering to in essence. I do think AI will make us dumber overall, and I sort of wish it was never invented.

But it was. And, being realistic, I will try to extract as much positive value from it as possible instead of discounting it wholly.

There's something to investigate here.

Made me notice I'm actually exposed to very similar crap on other places. Scary.

BUT. For 99% of tasks I'm totally certain there's people out there that are orders of magnitude better at them than me.

If the AI can regurgitate their thinking, my output is better.

Humans may need to think to advance the state of the art.

Humans may not need to think to just... do stuff.

Congrats on the launch again!

A general question for the room: where's the tipping point where you need a "proper" backend, in a different language, with all the inconveniences of possible type safety issues and impedance mismatches?

Because I feel like for 90% of small-medium projects it's just good enough with all the backend stuff within the same Next.js process as the front-end. I just do "separation of concerns"-ish with the code organization and funnel all communication with something structured and type safe like tRPC.

Feels separate enough but very pleasant to work anyway.

Am I doing it wrong?

What's your take on opinionated distros like Doom Emacs or Spacemacs?

I've been doing my daily journaling and task management on Emacs for while now, using Doom Emacs. Rationale was that it'd be mostly pre-configured to a sane standard and that, for actual text editing, I'm a long time vim enjoyer, so evil mode is great there.

However I always feel that when I go beyond the safe borders of the preconfigured, leader-key-accessible realm, I'm quite lost. I don't have good intuitions on how to interact with more raw parts of the system.

And I do want to venture further, so I'm feeling I need to get re-started with one of the recommended tutorials/books.

Should I start fresh Emacs install instead?

PS: I've coded in a bunch of lisps in the past and I have already done a bit of customization on top of Doom, so I sort of know my way around, but I'm just not comfortable I guess.

I routinely re-play games like Diablo 2 or BG1/2 and I couldn't care less about graphics, voice acting or motion capture.

BS code smells the same in any language.

Beginner devs don't even know what smelling means.

It sort of is, indirectly, and I agree with pretty much everything.

But the bit about sycophancy was particularly enlightening. I actually thought "plain" ChatGPT-like interfaces could be good for learning. But the Youtube ROAS example is really powerful. If the student can skew the teacher's conclusions so much just by the way they phrase their questions/answers, we're going to mislead new programmers en masse.

I'm not even sure that the extensive prompting they say they use for their "Boots" is good enough.

I guess in the age of AI you still need someone to repeatedly reject your pull requests until you learn. And AI won't be that someone, at least for now.

This is nonsensical. Someone did something for free. Fantastic. They used it, successfully, for a production system that enables scheduling for their job.

Nobody took that away from them. They didn't force them to rebuild their tool.

The code is even there, in the git history, available for them.

If OP doesn't like what the devs decided to do with the project, just move on or fork and pay someone to help you fix any outstanding bugs or missing features.

I did read the post. I know OP not a programmer. And that makes it even worse: OP has the audacity of saying they "make no money from the project" while it being a scheduling tool for their presumably plenty money-making clinic.

It would in fact be less shocking if they were a programmer doing a side project for fun.

This piece is not a rational, well tempered article. Is a rant by someone who just took something that was free and is now outraged and saying fuck you to those who made their project possible in the first place, not even understanding how licenses work or even being aware that the code they relied on is still there, on github, fully intact, and available for them.

This sort of people not only want to get it for free. They want their code to be maintained and improved for free in perpetuity.

They deserve to be called freeloaders.

But I'm now here to defend Datastar.

It's their code, which, up to now, they built and literally given away totally for free, under a MIT license. Everything (even what "they moved to the Pro tier") should still be free and under the MIT license that it was published under originally.

You just decided to rely and freeload (as, as far as I can tell, you never contributed to the project).

You decided to rely on a random third party that owns the framework. And now you're outraged because they've decided that from now on, future work will be paid.

You know the three magic words:

Just. Fork. It.