partyficial
proverbs wouldn't have stood the test of time if they were books.
When the car was invented, there were a lot of accidents. Horses were slow and safe. Today, very few know how their car works, but none would go back to horses.
Same thing with programming in Assembly -> high-level-languages. The next logical step is the highest level language (natural).
that's just biology and it's the case the world over, not only spanish countries.
"Faster than C++ and than safe Rust, ..."
perfectly legible ?
would you fly in an airplane if the software was written mostly by Claude?
If an engineer who mostly used Claude left the company, can his replacement understand his mental model, given that he himself doesn't ?
yeah
that's messed up
All these translation layers exist because the computers only understand 0s & 1s. Imagine talking to a person who only understood binary numbers.
socratic method exists. almost none follows it.
Not in full. I plan to read the LLM's summary. Most people could benefit from brevity.
author : writes the summary (prompt). LLM expands it to article.
reader : LLM summarizes the article. reader reads it.
both author and reader are free to use, or not use LLM. I don't see the big deal here.
This is an unnecessary argument both ways. Whether you use a LLM or write it yourself or read it yourself (and then comment on it), you're putting your signature beneath it. I don't care whether you use your natural brain or an artifical brain (LLM)
sounds like a cope. like shifting goalposts. or no true scotsman fallacy.
if I see a tree in front of me, and 2 seconds later I close my eyes, and someone asks me if there is a tree in front of me, should I say yes because I "know" it, or because I "believe" it ?
In that 2 seconds, the tree could have fallen down. So if i said "yes", I wouldn't be lying but I would be incorrect.
Therefore all "knowledge" is belief about some past "truth". Whether you call it faith, evidence-based, dogma etc. they all do fall under the same bucket if you think deeply about it.
you know, like religion.
It is the only video in that channel, and worth it.
seems like a very short timeline to me.
> long ways away
I'm constantly amazed by what people think is "long-term" on HN.
does that matter as well ?
If I say, your face is like the moon, I mean it is bright, not that it is a million miles away.
- rigidity vs flexibility
- determinism vs creativity
- conservative vs liberal
- right vs left
if you know exactly what you want and how to describe it, use SOAP-XML/REST etc.
if you don't know exactly what you want or how to describe it, use LLM/MCP
that's a bad thing ?
> you won't reap the benefits
but that IS my claim - I will reap benefits proportional to my actions (good or bad).
e.g. if global warming causes a flood, my house may be destroyed because I drove cars, but a boat would save me because I was vegetarian.
(the next salvo in this conversation will immediately turn into religious theology, so if that's not your thing, ignore this)
It gives same energy as "If I avoid murder, it won't make a difference since murders still happen in the world. If I avoid meat to help climate change, it won't make a difference since millions still eat meat".
The goal is not to get the WORLD to stop. It is to get ME to stop. I will reap its benefits regardless of what happens to others.
"Sanatana" in Sanatana Dharma means Eternal. The 4 cyclic yugas are well documented in every Sanskrit literature. We are currently in year 5127 of Kali Yug i.e. it started in 3102 BC with the departure of Bhagavan Krishna from earth after Kurukshetra war, which marked the end of previous yuga (Dwapara).
Kali Yug lasts 432,000 years. After which the next cycle begins.
Eventually after Brahma's lifetime is over, Pralaya occurs. Then the universe goes quiet for a long time, until Lord creates again. And this cycle of creation and destruction goes on forever.
you only need people's money if you can't control their labor.
did a plantation owner in the 1600s need the money of his slaves ?
if you control a robot that can fight and take over land, enslave workers for things robots are bad at, harvest food, create buildings etc. what do you need other people for ? your entertainment? robots can do that too.
"and some say she's just a big pair of tits"
Now i have to research whether two sources are true or not.