A year? I've regularly written that much in a month, and sometimes in a week. And, counter-intuitively, its during those sprints when I'm pumping out thousands of lines per day that I write the code that turns out to be the highest quality, requiring the fewest number of bugfixes later. I think it's because that very high productivity level can only happen when you're really in the zone, with the whole system held in your head. And when you have that full context, you make fewer mistakes, because mistakes mostly derive from not understanding the other pieces your code is interacting with.

Of course, that kind of focus is exhausting, and you can't do it long term.

By focusing on the structure, not the details. The LLM and the compiler and the formatter will get the low-level details right. Your job is to make sure the structure is correct and maintainable, and that the test suites cover all the bases, and then to scan the code for anomalies that make your antennas twitch, then dig into those and start asking questions -- not of product managers and developers, usually, but of the LLM!

But, yeah, it is challenging -- and also strangely addictive. I haven't worked more than 8 hours per day for years, but I find myself working 10+ hours per day on a regular basis, and then pulling out the laptop in bed at 11 PM to check on the last thing I told the AI to do, mostly because it's exhilarating to be able to get so much done, at such high quality, so quickly.

This is actually a legitimate solution to some classes of problems - you have an overseer AI for your natural language interface that delegates tasks to subordinate AIs using LLMs tuned for specific tasks.

It's worse than authoritative - it's kissing your ass.

You: "Hey, AI, I think the world is flat and rests on the back of an infinite stack of turtles"

AI: "That's a great, here's how that works: [blather]"

People love having their ass kissed. If you don't have control over your ego, you're going to accept AI hallucinations more readily.

"Brain fry" makes it sound like the workers are failing, but it's not them. There are ways AI can augment your job - I use it as a quick way to search and compile relevant results into something I can use, and occasionally to produce simple snippets of code.

If you're a low-skill coder trying to be an expert because you have AI to 'help', then your manager did an awful job of understanding both AI's capabilities and yours. If you're a high-skill coder and your manager expects 10x the output from you after firing all your supporting coders to be replaced with AI... same deal.

On the other hand, if you're an occasional low/mid skill guy usually working solo like me, AI will make your life a lot easier once you learn to spot the hallucinations.

That's a valid point, though right now while they're facing competition from startups the dealerships do provide them with a moat that they want to preserve. If/when the startup threat is gone, the automakers will go back to hating the dealerships.

I think people forget how everyone laughed at Tesla because everyone knew that starting a new car company in the United States was impossible. Now we also have Lucid and Rivian. Maybe someday Aptera will manage to get off the ground. This is a novel situation for American carmakers.

> All in all, it was just ...so american.

My father often said that if you want tits and explosions to watch with your brain turned off, you watch American. If you want something that doesn't spoon feed you, watch British. If you want to commit suicide, watch something Scandinavian.

Things have evolved a bit since those days, but it's not the worst general rule to start with.

And that the 'Newtonian' physics of Gravity wasn't.

I'm a huge buzzkill. I can watch Pacific Rim with a smile on my face, but tell me you've made something realistic when you haven't and it nukes suspension of disbelief for me completely.

For attracting venture capital, about 10 years ago.

They had to say it that way, because the more accurate statement is that the dealership law unfairly advantages existing automakers. It's not about the dealerships being good or bad, it's about the fact that setting up a dealership network takes a lot of time and money and requiring it is a good way to keep new competition out.

The correct term is "regulatory capture". Private businesses use the power of the state to protect, subsidize or otherwise benefit them and harm competitors and potential competitors. It's extremely common and the more pervasive the regulation is, the more common it is. Red tape and government procedures benefit entrenched players who have built the institutional structures and knowledge to deal with them.

This isn't to say that all regulation is bad... but a lot of it is. There was never any consumer benefit to banning direct sales. All regulations should be thoroughly scrutinized for their effects on the market, direct and indirect.

I thought exactly the opposite. I think Rocky is far too "human". I didn't mind it, though, because a lot of the humor would be lost if Rocky was properly alien.

I think that's necessary. Providing explanations of depth comparable to the book would require a 10-hour movie. Squeezing the story down to feature length requires cutting a lot of exposition. In many books there's a lot of description that can be replaced with visuals, but it's pretty hard to do that with a lot of the science.

Every time Hollywood sells a movie as 'realistic', it's turned out to be bullshit. The trade mags and entertainment reporters repeat the lie, but that doesn't make it true.

I'll be watching this movie soon, it looks fun. I will not expect them to get physics anywhere close to correct enough that someone with a decent high school physics class under their belt won't see where they got it wrong.

I'm sure you'd have said the same about Y2K. It's a good thing that some people have more foresight.

Probably humanoid robots, it's already happening in China:

https://jingdaily.com/posts/ch...