Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re: Reviewing code is more effort than writing cod (Score 1) 60

The code they write is an absolute shit-show for a number of reasons.
You can get work done, if you don't mind the glaring fucking inefficiency of it- time wasted trying to coax it into doing what you want, how you want it- more spaghetti-at-the-wall write-test cycles than you'd expect for a first-year programmer, glaring logic errors that you need to correct (that to be fair, usually come from a lack of fleshed-out instruction on your part- but still, if my instructions are larger than the code, what prize have I won?), but I do find that they're quite alright at having a chunk of code stuffed into their context and coming up with unit tests for everything they notice within it. Sometimes they even surprise me and come up with tests for things I didn't think of.

Comment Re:Manus (Score 1) 32

The ones I have been in don't talk anything like that. And I've been in many.

Not that many apparently.
They talk like that in the board room, they talk like that when it's 2 CEOs out for a drink (and you got drug along, since you're the Chief Engineer), and they talk that way when they're just shooting the shit.
Hanging out with groups of executives in Vegas during conventions leads me to want to fucking kill myself. It's not human conversation. It's weird cosplaying.

The different scopes involve different speaking terms, those with a military bent have one set of recurring terms. Technology based boards, another. Marketing yet another, along with fiduciary involved boards. Some of the groups I have been in have significant overlap.

Board of directors. You're crossing boards and groups, and it has confused you.

Once you have been in a field, you end up getting used to the terms used, and they are logical.

Bullshit.

"Manus is the action engine that goes beyond answers to execute tasks, automate workflows, and extend your human reach." Now that is bullshit. And if someone said that in a board I'm on,, I'd tell them it was bullshit.

And if you said that to the person who said it in the board of directors that I sit on, that would be the last thing you ever said in it, and subsequently, that position.

What boards have you served on to gain that unassailable knowledge?

Board of Directors for a medium sized LLC, and smaller LLCs that we acquired before dissolving.

Comment Re:Not the problem (Score 1) 60

Some models have been overly-sycophantic, however that's the exception- and a gross failure in fine-tuning, not the norm.
ChatGPT 5.2:

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

...
Quick, checkable evidence the Earth isn’t flat
...
Why “infinite turtles” doesn’t work as a physical model
...

That being said- I do agree with the final point: If you're one of those people who has a serious inferiority complex, or some kind of gross insecurity, you're going to swallow up affirmation when models produce it.
But a lot of work goes into trying to make sure they don't.

Comment Re:Not unique to AI (Score 1) 60

you can't trust an AI to truly remember anything you tried to "teach" it if it even got a look at your fixes of their crappy code, because even if it did, the next version of the bot's engine may need to be retrained from scratch as it "forgot" almost everything.

Completely incorrect.
An LLM remembers nothing that doesn't fit into its context.
To that end, we have standardized files that are pumped into the context as a form of "long term guidance/memory". The engine has nothing to do with this.

Plus, it is REALLY hard to get AI to understand general code design philosophies like "3 strikes and you refactor" - it is designed to regurgitate first, not solve problems by increasing the use of shared code.

Also completely incorrect.
It'll do as you ask. If you ask it to refactor at some threshold of attempts at getting the test to pass with an implementation- it will.

I look at some AI results and all I see is tech debt that will eventually kill the product but never get fixed because nobody quite understands the original task it was trying to do when it just did 'copy and mod'.

Tech debt in LLM output is real, and yes- precisely because nobody gives a fuck what it's producing, and thus doesn't really understand it.
However, generative models are not "copying and modding".

Comment Re:Wozniak - the real reason for Apple (Score 1) 46

Check out Clive Sinclair - he was an engineer and did pretty damn well selling his computers in the UK.

Kinda, I mean he did well, but it went under. Acorn did somewhat better and parts of Acorn are alive and well to this day.

Furber and Wilson lacked that marketing muscle. Were they a unique talent? I mean... no one else did that. Their CPU worked first time, outperformed their contemporaries, ran at a fraction of the power cost a fraction of the amount and went on to become massively popular.

Maybe Woz couldn't have done that, but it doesn't mean Jobs was the one required to help him, any competenant marketing type could have done the same. Vew few people could have designed the hardware and software that Woz did at the time.

I'd argue that Jobs was unusually good at marketing. Maybe as rare as Woz. I mean, look at the cult of personality that's developed around him where people think Apple (or really Jobs himself) invented all sorts of things which were actually popularized by Apple, but invented by someone else.

His schtick works.

Comment Re:Wozniak - the real reason for Apple (Score 5, Insightful) 46

Jobs gets all the accolades and fame but he was just a pushy sociopath in a suit,

Suit? The guy who famously wore a black turtleneck all the time?

Anyhoo. I think people outside tech overestimate the importance of CEOs and people in tech underestimate it. Without Jobs, Woz probably would have been a really great engineer in some company and you'd never have heard of him at all. He wasn't a product guy, and you need a product not just raw tech to sell. Selling stuff being somewhat important for a company.

Steve Jobs also had a functioning reality distortion field, something not all that many people have and that's really important for building a company...

Comment Re:advice to children (Score 3, Insightful) 192

Slavery was once legal because there were not laws AGAINST it. Laws don't make things legal, they make them illegal.

What utter bullshit.

The state of slavery is of such a nature, that it is incapable of being introduced on any reasons, moral or political; but only positive law, -- Lord Chief Justice William Mansfield

And you know that general line of reasoning was why slavery had to be actually recognised in the constitution because if you have a nation of any laws at all you need to pass a law to not have them apply to some people.

Comment Re: Why are lawsuits allowed against end users? (Score 1) 42

Tencent?

They are on the steering committee.

no matter how "open source" they claim the process to be, and subject to American export laws.

What? A process isn't open source, code is. There are open source implementations of AV1 (or 2) and H.265 (and 6). Anything can be subject to American export laws, whether or not it makes sense, but America can't enforce that outside America (or even inside some of the time).

Comment Re:Thought so (Score 2) 42

and AAC is better than Ogg for the same bandwidth

Is it? When I followed such things that was the case for a while, but the encoders started getting better. Heck the MP3 encoders got so good they were surprisingly close. I thought all of the codecs of that later gen ended up basically on a par.

Anyway didn't Opus wipe the floor with all of them being better in every combo of bitrate and latency than the competition?

Comment Re:Why are lawsuits allowed against end users? (Score 1) 42

Yep.

But also I'm guessing they are suing Snap because they consider them to be a much softer target than, say, Google, Microsoft, Meta, Amazon, Samsung or Tencent (like they'd care lol) who would likely kerb stomp them into the next millennium without even noticing.

Big enough to matter, not big or experienced enough to put up a good fight. And also holy shit they've been having a terrible time of it on the NYSE! Halved in value this year (and 1/10 from the covid peak). I expect they are perceived as not likely to want a protracted and expensive legal battle, and Dolby have identified the weakest zebra worth eating in the herd.

Patent troll fuckers.

Slashdot Top Deals

"For a male and female to live continuously together is... biologically speaking, an extremely unnatural condition." -- Robert Briffault

Working...