wanderlust123

Let's say the book was written by AI. Can you you explain what makes you less excited about this stuff?

Like is there a concrete issue with the book you have?

People enjoyed the process of solving a problem.

Your present a false dichotomy; that mathematicians care about the result, or are rent seeker that just wants to play about with puzzles.

Many people enjoyed the process of finding things out for it's own sake.

This seems more like you projecting what you want in terms of what you enjoy and hoping the world optimises around that preference.

The truth is LLMs is what you need to be optimising around as they will become the standard.

"My gut feeling is that the AI field is eventually going to discover how much overlap it has with information and communications theory."

I think researchers in the field are very much aware of information and communications theory, it's a bit naive to think they don't.

An LLM can absolutely do the harder stuff too. I wonder what model you have used where you think it's only for the easy stuff.

Of course you need understanding for when shit hits the fan, but that applies regardless of whether it's a human or an LLM writing the code.

Ok give me an example of how you would get mass unskilled labour to be paid more than scarce skilled labour?

Can you give me an example of a type if labour that is in comparatively high supply and also commands a high wage?

As far as I am concerned unskilled labour always has a lower value than skilled labour due to supply and demand.

Layering on laws and regulations does not change that.

Supply and demand and their impact on price are perhaps the closest thing to natural law in economics (barring some niche edge cases)

It would be akin to saying its unfair humans can’t fly due to gravity

Surprised they spent 1000 days on math and still don’t understand correlation is not causation

Why does the universe being bounded imply mathematics is finite?

Yet he has got richer on the back of spacex …

I don’t think we need to over complicate a megalomaniac desire for more power and wealth.

People pay for good tools. Tools help create value, and if they are good at creating value the toolmaker should be compensated.

What is this real difficult stuff you speak of that only you can do and LLMs can not?

All this equally applies to working in the office.

The best is remote with an option to come into the office.

This way you are maximizing flexibility and allowing workers to self select into their preferred way of working.

Anything else is suboptimal.

What kind of economic modelling uses Lean?

That’s not surprising. I have been using Deepseek and it consistently produces excellent output given the right context howevwr. It depends on the task as it does have blindspots.

Every executive wants to inject LLMs downstream from their own job. As you get away from execution and toward management the incentive to innovate gets less and less as management at the same level.

Well that’s a problem of incentives. Why would a manager outsource their own job to an AI?

100%

People on HN love complaining at any given moment.

I’d wager most of these people don’t really produce much and are constantly bikeshedding.

There’s no claim being made that your rewrite cannot be better.

He has provided benchmark results which provide a dimension amongst which to measure your rewrite. If you can do better by all means post your rewrite.

Finally, these kind of projects can eventually over time become projects that are actively used. Postgres is not some entity that existed before the universe was created; it was also created by someone and then eventually adoption picked up over time.

These execs suffer from over confidence in their own abilities.

Thats partly why they get so far.

Thank you, I think this is a noble effort. Knowledge is being created at a rapid rate and being able to surface interesting stuff is valuable.

It’s not a highly creative art at all, genuinely don’t get this weird compliance glazing here.

That happens already at a much larger scale, without prediction markets.

These markets decentralise that information asymmetry.

I find working with Go a lot like working with Lego. I agree it lacks some nice primitives (Result / Option types as you mentioned) and nil pointers is a flaw, but overall sheer plug and play nature of the language makes it highly productive. There is simply a lot less compiler gymnastics between what I want to code and how to get there. Combined with LLMs to do sanity checks it’s pretty nice to work with.

The simplicity of Go is a feature…

Fully agree with this. We use Rust in an enterprise setting for building web app backends and the experience is painful. A lot of crates just seem like someones side project. Too many ways to do things leads to bike shedding in PRs. Compile times are atrocious and can take like 30 mins to build.

Honestly using Go would have got us to the same point much quicker, with code that is much easier to review.

I think at this point there is no convincing people. Clearly there is value in these tools and it generates code when steered properly. Perhaps your struggles are down to a skill issue.

You are the product whenever you are sending your data to an LLM not controlled by you.

Nothing specific to Deepseek.

Lack of static types is one of the main reasons. Trying to decipher a complex ruby on rails codebase is unnecessarily difficult compared typescript. The tooling is also shit unless you use Ruby Mine.

An absolute shame given how good the functionality is baked into RoR.