poorcedural
poorcedural on Hacker News
Humans are fine, the problem is your worth.
The idea of tying source code to sustenance will soon be history. We will all remember the days when adding some few thousand smart lines of code meant you could gain notoriety and through cheap viral copy expand those traits to wealth and worth. But software has always just been zeros and ones, the value only happens when interpreted.
The future is sharing, you may not believe because your income is tied to being clever. Long term we are all more clever because of the sharing, and your contribution sometimes does not add to your personal success. Asking a company or its individuals to forego their success will not make them add more to our future. But they will add to our future nonetheless, because they all feel like we all do, that adding is what we are all meant to do.
Posted by
poorcedural on Saturday August 02, 2025 @03:38AM
from the ask-hn dept.
One of you AI researchers with almost all data and cheap compute has already thought of this. What would it look like to visualize all human knowledge?1. Tag all content with a date (probably almost done). In long passages, estimate a date based on published + written rate.
2. Once every sentence or phrase has a date, create a few blockchains. One for short thoughts (128 tokens), and more...
Proof that the USA is the largest exporter of inflation. UBI can not compete with strategic inflation on a global scale.
Right now, as for the last century, the USA manufactures identity and all the products that make you feel like YOU. It used to be Levis and Coca-Cola, now it is all the premier tech Hacker News places value FAANG+ (minus TikTok). If the USA continues inventing identity, those identities should be grounded in merchandise only made in the USA.
Foundational programmers form the base of where the seed can grow.
In a way programmers found where our roots grow, they can not find your limits.
Software 3.0 is a step into a different light, where software finds its own limits.
If we know where they are rooted, we will merge their best attempts. Only because we appreciate their resultant behavior.
Time is a funny calculator, measuring how an individual is behind. And in the funny circumstance that an individual is human, they look back on this comment in 3 years and wonder why humans only see themselves.
Very insightful! How you would describe boiling an egg is different than how a machine would describe it to another machine.
Andrej, maybe Software 3.0 is not written in spoken language like code or prompts. Software 3.0 is recorded in behavior, a behavior that today's software lacks. That behavior is written and consumed by machine and annotated by human interaction. Skipping to 3.0 is premature, but Software 2.0 is a ramp.
Because we are still using code as a proof that needs to be proven. Software 3.0 will not be about reviewing legible code, with its edge-cases and exploits and trying to impersonate hardware.
It is not the code, which just like prompts is a written language. Software 3.0 will be branches of behaviors, by the software and by the users all documented in a feedback loop. The best behaviors will be merged by users and the best will become the new HEAD. Underneath it all will be machine code for the hardware, but it will be the results that dictate progress.
Software 3.0 is where Engineers only create the kernel or seed of an idea. Then all users are developers creating their own branch using the feedback loop of their own behavior.
Love = loss. If you think that equation requires less from either side, you have not felt. To love, you have to lose. Lose yourself, and all that currently holds you. What are you waiting for?
And when your love dies and leaves you an empty husk, you can look back and embrace that loss that emptied you. Don't hide from love/loss. Life won't leave you alone, life has infinite love and loss.
Why do we not value QBASIC in billions? Honestly, we value current Van Gogh paintings in billions. The past cost us more, we got here because of that art fought through decades of litigation. Does progress mean we forget all of that and hope on a promise of easy answers?
And bias, especially in science and politics travels as a wave through time like a pendulum. Solving these systems, with the resistance measured in human lives, can take many generations.