akra

6 ms·

1.
by akra 10mo ago
Sadly capitalism rewards scarcity at a macro level, which in some ways is the opposite of efficiency. It also grants "social status" to the scarce via more resources. As long as you aren't disrupted, and everyone in your indu
2.
by akra 10mo ago
There is also a chance that a lot of this capex is written off, and the money becomes "sunk". Bad for the current players, but given inference costs as you mention are profitable, after the writeoffs and the market correction the
3.
by akra 11mo ago
I think you can enjoy both aspects - both the problem solving and the craft. There will be people who agree that of course from a rational perspective solving the problem is what matters, but for them personally the "fun" is gone.
4.
by akra 1y ago
In my view its a tool, at least for the moment. Learn it, work out how it works for you, and what it doesn't work for you. But assuming you are the professional they should trust your judgement, and you should also earn that trust. Tha
5.
by akra 1y ago
I think the reason for the negativity in this forum (and other threads I've seen over the past few months) is because people are engaged with AI and it seems are deep down not happy with its direction even if they are forced to adapt.
6.
by akra 1y ago
The question is not whether you can or can't, but whether it is still worth it long term: - There is a moat of doing so (i.e. will people actually pay for your SaaS knowing that they could do it too via AI) and.. - How many large scale
7.
by akra 1y ago
I sadly think if the promise of AI happens this is the likely economic outcome. The last century or so was an anomaly from most of human history; a trend created by the "arms race" of needing educated workers. The prisoner's
8.
by akra 1y ago
That's what AI does. Makes power and politics have even more of a premium vs say learning, intelligence and hard work. Connections, wealth and power. It is almost ironic that our industry is inventing the thing that empowers the people
9.
by akra 1y ago
Many tech companies and/or training places did try to though didn't they? I know they do boot camps, coding classes in schools and a whole bunch of other initiatives to get people into the industry. Teaching kids and adults coding
10.
by akra 1y ago
Agree with most of what you said except for the "big bucks" part. Why would I pay for your product when I can ask the AI to do it? To be honest I think I would rather use that money for anything else if I can spend a little bit of
11.
by akra 1y ago
That's kinda obvious that's their goal especially with the current focus on coding of most of the AI labs in most announcements - it may be augmentation now but that isn't the end game. Everything else these AI labs do, while
12.
by akra 1y ago
I'm not sure where construction and physical work goes into your categories. Process and chores maybe. But I think AI will struggle in the physical domain - validation is difficult and repeated experiments to train on are either too ri
13.
by akra 1y ago
This is what I think as well. Unfortunately for the AI proponents they already made an example of the software industry. Its on news reports in the US and globally; most people are no longer recommending to get into the industry, etc. Softw
14.
by akra 1y ago
I'm not saying there is a centralised force - I didn't say the government per se. Its enough to say many of the models coming out of China - the AI portion isn't their main income source especially for the major models that p
15.
by akra 1y ago
This is the reason IMO. Fundamentally China right now is better at manufacturing (e.g. robotics). AI is the complement to this - AI increases the demand for tech manufactured goods. Whereas America is in the opposite position w.r.t which si
16.
by akra 2y ago
Just my opinion/observation really but I believe its because people are implicitly entertaining the possibility that it is no longer about software or rather this announcement implicitly states that talent long term isn't the main
17.
by akra 2y ago
More likely they will tailor/RL train these models to go after coders first. Use RLHF employing coders where labor is cheap to train their models. A number of reasons for this of course: - Faster product development on their side as th
18.
by akra 2y ago
Its a common view from the "do'ers" (the people who made most of the value in the past; the hard workers, etc) that this will make management redundant. Sadly with a basic understanding of economics you can see this is probab
19.
by akra 2y ago
The default position is that it will decrease the need of what the middle class can offer (skilled labor). All else being equal that increases the value of the other factors of production (the next bottleneck) such as capital and land. Unle
20.
by akra 2y ago
Money buys real assets which will be worth something; AI can't magic up land or energy for instance. In fact AI is a dream for capital, and a nightmare for labor/work/human intelligence w.r.t value.
21.
by akra 2y ago
A lot of the fluff is all about boosting sales IMO which is where a lot of money for tech comes from. When MBA types (a large chunk of tech's buyers) hear the promises of efficiency, and replacing workers they get all excited very very
22.
by akra 2y ago
Indeed. I'm already seeing it in software at least anecdotally where people's will to post code open source/answer Stackoverflow questions, etc are drying up (i.e. am I working hard just to train someone else's AI?). Mig
23.
by akra 2y ago
> 1. Learn how the subject matter experts do the work. This will get harder I think over time as low hanging fruit domains are picked - the barrier will be people not technology. Especially if the moat for that domain/company is the
24.
by akra 2y ago
My hypothesis is that F# is somewhat self selecting at senior/lead dev's who would have a lot of choice in the language that they get to choose not the army of "code monkey's" as you call them. Generally this would
25.
by akra 2y ago
I've found this when seeing F# team adoption in the past especially if coming from outside the .NET ecosystem (no previous .net knowledge). It is easier learning F# for a number of reasons BUT as per another comment when you need to us
26.
by akra 2y ago
Its ironic that the thing that is hard to learn about F# is C#, or more to the point, the patterns/idioms in C# libraries and frameworks. I've seen the same reaction more from people coming from other ecosystems personally working
27.
by akra 2y ago
> " don't think there is pressure to move F# teams off to C#." To clarify I didn't say the move was to C# specifically. What I meant was another tech stack often in a different problem space (e.g. frontend with Typesc
28.
by akra 2y ago
As someone who has used F# in production at least in my experience running teams that do (on some very large products generating significant value to be vague about it) teams don't want to stop using it once they get over the initial h
29.
by akra 2y ago
Its an interesting question. I've found personally people with previous imperative/functional language (e.g. JS/Go/etc) have picked up F# quicker, and people with OO knowledge (C++, Java, etc) have picked up C# quicker.
30.
by akra 3y ago
For Python that is properly source controlled, audited and understood I do agree it isn't that hard to port. However unlike many more compiled languages there's probably a LOT of python code out there that isn't which makes c

More ›