To me the plight of Hollywood is “forever shows” where the writers start without knowing where it would end, so shows never really “end” they just slowly fizzle out without ever getting to the end.

I simply loved “the good place” for having such a powerful conclusion.

Also ai makes things just resource constrained, not labour - whatever you imagined, you could make happen, just needed to “talk to an ai” about it. Lots of terraforming Mars / Venus in that book were imagined like that.

But it also analysed the social / political / behavioural aspects of it. Places that had to preserve old power structures - aka US/Europe/China - got engulfed with mega corps controlling everything etc.

But Mars - where people had enough freedom to imagine something different, came up with political/financial structures to incorporate all of that, and thrived.

I think it tried to play the card of “if US was being created right now - what would its ideals be” If you had a huge tract of land that was “free” and nobody (powerful enough) claiming it, and a population that didn’t yet have strong allegiances and could be persuaded to band together, what would AI, tech and all these years of progress allow us as humans to achieve politically.

Which also makes you feel kinda sad for the US in that world - it is the old rusted power center that can’t innovate and is stuck in the past…

Now it’s only sci fi of course, but it was quite interesting to imagine a world where AI gets smarter and smarter but never reaches that “sentient” threshold. I think the whole trilogy aged incredibly well all things considered.

You asking them for advice or for them to show you around might push them to do something fun themselves, which they haven’t done in a while. But they have a lot more local context about what _might_ be good to explore or not.

They also know people - they themselves might have average days, but everyone knows that fun person that is the social glue that does all the fun stuff they can direct you - 7 degrees of separation and all that.

And lastly sure - treat the locals ideas with a grain of salt - I never do _exactly_ what the locals tell me, but it is another data point to make your own plans.

When I travel I like to make huge holes in my plans - uncharted time for me to fill in when I’m at location - from local sources or just doing the research then and there. It has always been more natural and interesting to do the sight seeing planing at location, so you can adjust and correct anyway. I guess have adopted the startup mentality of start small and iterate even for my travel experiences :)

PMs can now cross reference and organize tickets with just a few keystrokes. Organisational knowledge, business knowledge, design systems and patterns, etc all of it is encoded in LLM consumable artefacts. For PMs it is the same switch - instead of having to do it by hand you direct lower level employees to handle the details and inconsistencies and you just do vibe and vision.

When all of the pieces successfully connect and execute reliably, what is left for humans to do? Just direct and consume?

And AI companies with their huge swaths of data are soon gonna be in the situation of being able to do the directing themselves

I follow the plan -> red/green/refactor approach and it is surprisingly good, and the plans it produces all look super well reasoned and grounded, because the agent will slurp all the docs and forums with discussions and the like.

Trouble is once it starts working there would inevitably be a point where the docs and the implementation actually differ - either some combination of tools that have not been used in that way, some outdated docs, or just plain old bugs.

But if the goals of the project/feature are stated clearly enough it is quite capable of iterating itself out of an architectural dead end, that is if it can run and test itself locally.

It goes as deep as inspecting the code of dependencies and libraries and suggesting upstream fixes etc. all things that I would personally do in a deep debugging session.

And I’m supper happy with that approach as I’m more directing and supervising rather than doing the drudgery of it.

Trouble is a lot of my team mates _dont_ actually go this deep when addressing architectural problems, their usual mode of operandi is “escalate to the architect”.

This will not end up good for them in the long run I feel, but not sure what they can do themselves - the window of being able to run and understand everything seems to be rapidly closing.

Maybe that’s not super bad - I don’t exactly what the compiler is doing to translate things to machine code, and I definitely don’t get how the assembly itself is executed to produce the results I want at scale - that is level of magic and wizardry I can only admire (look ahead branching strategies and caching on modern cpus is super impressive - like how is all of this even producing correct responses reliable at such a a scale …)

Anyway - maybe all of this is ok - we will build new tools and frameworks to deal with all of this, human ingenuity and desire for improvement, measured in likes, references or money will still be there.

My fear is that this is also being reshaped with ai, mostly for good now but I feel like the personal touch and passion of these creators is being diluted with the advent of generated content.

Maybe we are in a valley of the uncanny valley and the ai tools will become so good that they can successfully translate someone’s passionate vision faithfully, then it could be another renaissance.

Learning how software is built is hard and gruelling work, and you need to constantly invest in yourself. Trouble is there is no time left to “go back to basics and learn FP” for example, because you also need to keep up with all the new LLM stuff happening on top of that.

It is easy for us who already have the foundational knowledge to be able to step back, take the wheel and try to do it ourselves, but plenty of people simply don’t have that option.

And I expect this trend to deepen and broaden. There will definitely be a lot more “witches” than actual engineers.

Yes they ship people around somewhat fast. Slower than possible with other methods, and the cost is incredible - economic (much more expensive per passenger than almost any alternative), political (they inherently divide people, dehumanise and make people never really share a public space), health - they reduce lifespan by both lowering living quality as well as directly killing a staggering amount of humans per year).

And we have learned how to build better places for humans that do not need these coffins on wheels - if you visit any European capital, and most Asian ones - you will see environments built for humans, not cars - soo much nicer.

So cars as a technology have definitely not been beneficial to humanity overall, but it has been somewhat useful to some.

I think strongtowns were very good advocates of what places in America could like if you look beyond cars. I personally like the “not just bikes” channel though.

https://ivank.github.io/ddecryptor/

These are off the top of my head.

The Catholic Church thing - yea that was quite unexpected for me, and apparently accidental for the church too - the basic premise was - they banned cousin marriage, and heavily enforced it throughout all of society - kings to peasants - this drove people to move around and settle outside of their home towns, driving up individualism and just changing the way our brains work on a neurological level - we have always been a close nit kin social structure animals.

The e book explains it quite well with tons of historical data, neuroscience, comparisons with different countries, continents and social structures.

It got me to “understand” India on a much deeper level since I moved here from Europe, and not get pissed off at people for “not thinking things through”. But also appreciate how small and consistent things can drive profound changes. Also how did china/ussr speed run the Industrial Revolution so quickly - spoiler alert - they copied the same “ban cousin marriage” thing

Basically banding into groups and guarding against outsiders is the default human behaviour. It just works that way if you do a game theory analysis of our social structures. They usually don’t scale too well, but that’s what we revolved to do as social creatures.

It’s actually and very counter intuitively the Catholic Church that lead us to individualism, common laws, nationalism, even the Industrial Revolution and the scientific method.

It sounds bizarre but if you follow the historical logic, in a round about way it has paved the way for the modern world, which the rest of human civilisation was forced to adopt, either to compete or at gunpoint.

There are few books I read in a year that change the way I look at the world, “The Weirdest people in the world” was definitely one of them.

Motivation was people being so allergic to tests and automation, that making them use superpowers produced better code, but also started adding a test pyramid.

The mandate was actually phrased in a way that you must produce industry standard code, and if you struggle with it you can use cc to bridge the gap.

Honestly I worry that this way devs will produce higher quality code, but will not understand why, how to measure the “quality” and steer towards it themselves.

At this point though the founders were pretty adamant with the code quality and lack of tests so this seemed like a reasonable way for the company, and I am curious to see how such a mandate affects code, deliverables and individual’s knowledge.

So far it seems to be working as intended, but it is early days.

With just a little bit of propaganda spin, or even without it, US just proved to the entire Iranian population that IRGS was right all along.

This should strengthen or even harden their regime as they will have new generation of hardliners join the movement.

This is like 1930s Germany kinda thing. Who won or lost is semantics at this point, the regime is free to spin it any way they want, and will have quite the support to do it.

I have grown up in rural Russia in the 80s and that was also similar - a forest started 50m from our house and I would just get lost there from time to time - not fun for my parents but magical for me.

Then we moved to the middle of a European capital city (Sofia) and I _still_ had almost a forest right next to the apartment block we used to live in - enough of a forest that as a 10yo kid I could find a nook to build myself a small hut with a burning fireplace inside it and nobody complained.

There are plenty of big European cities that are 10-20mins short unsupervised trip to a wilderness that a kid can do.

For example - Valencia has an uninterrupted bicycle highway that gets you from the city center to a wilderness preserve and a beach in less than an hour cycling.

To me all of these nature vs city laments are just US car dependency. Cities don’t have to be this way at all.

And don’t forget all the other expertise that comes from being a country that is able to build reliable nuclear reactors. China is _the_ production superpower not just because it can build x or y, it’s because it has all the supply chains to be able to do it at scale.

If a country invests into that expertise - you get a lot of very capable engineers, a lot of tech and supply chains to deal with making it all happen, again and again, at scale. That in itself would be something that can offset the raw “price” of a single reactor, though it is very hard to quantify.

Like how much has USA actually lost by relinquishing its historical role of guarding international trade? Maybe it won some independence, but maybe the upstream effects to its economy would be bad?

We don’t know for sure about nuclear, but when a similar scientific project was put on a national scale - the space race - USA got silicon valley out of it.

These are so much better than the interface fetch offers you, unfortunately.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47570312

Points: 9

# Comments: 0

The way the book is structured there is only one big reveal that would be spoiled by the movie, but I don’t think that was the most interesting thing in the book anyways, it was all about engineering, the scientific method and all that, and I think that will still hold before or after watching.

The one big exception I’ve found to “read the book first” advice to me has been “the expanse” there the books and the series were so great that they sort of complemented each other, and the advice there is “definitely do both”. I was reading the books and watching the series in parallel - side by side.

I do hope Hail Marry is like that…

If they strike desalination plants, Israel/us can do the same … really mass casualty event could follow.

And they might, at some point the Iranian gov might feel desperate enough to be like “fuck it, we have nothing to lose” … Dubai could end up with a lot more graves.

Almost all of their water comes from these plants, and humans can’t survive without water for more than 3 days …

There are reserves/stores sure, but how long will they last, and which part of the population do they cover? In a week you could have thousands of civilians dead on both sides.

So MAD keeps things in check.

I think this is whaly Iran has invested so much into rockets - they are very ineffective at providing decisive military victory by themselves, but without them, Iran will be at Israel’s mercy, and they have proven to not possess that in great amounts lately