And to buy an older car.

We're pretty close to a point where you can ask AI to make you the platform and tools you want and it just does that. Why would I pay for github or slack clones when it's been my experience that AI can craft a MVP in an hour long session and iterate on a more complete service as needed later.

Buying software is already dumb when we have open source. And now paying for a host of software is also going to be obsolete.

You should simultaneously believe both that nearly all AI investment is a bubble and also that AI tools are not going way.

At the risk of an appeal to authority fallacy. I do have some background, as I used to write drivers for two kinds of deep learning / DNN accelerators. One for inference that can slice and rotate memory views for TensorRT, and one for training that transparently distributes virtual memory on a multinode cluster.

We humans can easily understand an inference engine. It's not hard, and I would recommend checking one out, even if just from an introductory YouTube video. Or diving into something like llama.cpp is worth doing if you want to see the underlying math. The ugly bits are where it hooks into various backends, but there is a core piece that anyone with a decent C++ background can understand. Without C++ background, I'd recommend looking into simple-llm.

Starting with a simple but useful model like TinyLlama is a good point of research. Low requirements and the model is small enough to experiment on.

The models are a blob of data. Introspection is very limited, there is no history, and the weights (tensors really) are interdependent and even circular. So adjusting one weight can rippled through the model with unintended consequences. There is very little that one can formally reason about in a general way with a model. Maybe we'll have that kind of math one day, but right now we are stuck treating models as a black box.

So my response to anyone that claims that humans already understand what an LLM does is: Then show me.

That's perhaps the most interesting take on all of this. That's the psychology behind why we are running headlong into something so socially and economically disruptive that there are going to be more losers than winners.

And I get a lot of flack for talking about it. Probably because nobody likes being reminded that they have been fooled, conned into believing in the hype and dreams, while simultaneously ignoring the consequences and accountability. But at the end of the day regular folks are going to pay the price, because the investors and creators of technology will bear little practical responsibility for a problem this huge.

Nice thing about "drink 5 cups of coffee" is that anyone can do it, with really no effort. Even if the alleged benefits are just barely measurable with statistics.

Gen-X, but I can understand the confusion given that I can afford to own a home.

We trained massive statistical models and hooked them up to chat bots, coding tools and some to drones and sentry guns. With no idea how it actually works and zero fucks given on what the consequences are.

Majority shareholder of AMZN is aware of the position his company is in. He did attend luncheons and dinners to grovel at the feet of his new master.
And with a US Treasury backed Trump Account investment, you are getting a piece of BlackRock and info Vanguard ETFs. Nationalized investment options, you'd think that the communists would be super happy right now.

Any sane nation would avoid working with countries that have nationalized industry for operating a geopolitical agenda. That includes but is not limited to: Russia, China, and the USA.

It will be like explaining floppy disks and corded telephones to the current generation. That you used to have a physical piece of plastic with a magstrip or chip in it won't be relevant to people 5 years from now.

That you had credit, even if you were a student with no job, is going to be pretty alien to future generations. The vast majority of people will have a debit-like account with hidden fees and sale of spending habits and marketing info to support the business further. It will be like paying rent in order to spend your own money.

When I was a teenager the gas station sold NoDoz. But it also sold Mini-thins, which were better. (ephedrine-based asthma medications sold as an energy supplement)

I'd love to see the research on it. I assume outcomes are better. But it might depend on what "healthy" means. Low BMI (or waist-to-height ratio, which is a better metric IMO). Exercise and activity level probably matters. A healthy diet of fruits and vegetables, or of more lean protein heavy, or more cruciferous vegetables and little fruit. (the latter is my guess at what has the best outcome)

Genetics probably plays the biggest part of heart health. But we hand waive that since we don't have a lot of contorl over it.

I don't understand the desire for energy drinks. Why not get some antioxidants, tannins, polyphenols, etc that are in tea or coffee? especially when it's cheaper and you don't have to deal with sugar or artificial sweeteners. A taste thing perhaps, although I was really disappointed with Red Bull and RockStar. 5-hour energy isn't too bad, since you can just shoot it and I kind of like the flavor. But a case of them is like $50. Which buys me a whole lot of coffee beans and Chinese tea.

I was getting irregular heartbeat having 6 cups a day (nice espresso machine at my old job).

I lost some weight, lowered my blood pressure, added 2 miles of walking to my routine. And a blood pressure related migraine problem went away completely. And drinking 4 cups of coffee a day seems to not trigger any episodes. (plus I have a blood pressure cuff and measure my heart rate now, where as before I never checked it)

Improving one's baseline health is a bigger factor for most of us than finding the magic substance to consume.