Not many good programmers these days.

No point in it, managers don't care if you do a good job, as long as you close the ticket. For some managers, if you included bugs, that's a good thing. It's more tickets that can be opened.

Good job predicting that, you prophet.

Tim Cook thought AR (augmented reality) was the future, that's why he started putting in the beefy hardware. Turned out the future was in chatbots.

Now Tim is not in charge anymore, the things he liked at Apple are like old leaves flowing away in soft autumn wind.

By his second term, most people understood that Trump was a liar.

This wasn't a distinguishing feature since the other team lies, too.

The study is not sensational.

You should have at least read the abstract.

Maybe you should read the actual scientific paper instead of ranting. It will give you knowledge and improve your blood pressure. (In case you missed that last reference: ranting raises your blood pressure. There you go).

Man, if you're getting your science information from news stories, the problem is you.

We live in a world where the actual study is a click away. At least read the abstract.

Entangling multiple qbits is still tough

Their target audience is people who use Cursor AI for vibe coding.

Their target audience will be happy with the solution if they can set it up without thinking. Which one has more features mostly won't matter.

If it takes more tokens for an agent to do all that instead of using cursorRepo, then they're going to use cursorRepo. Their target audience is people who really really like vibe coding.

And Cursor has quite a bit of control over how many tokens it takes to do either one.

Indeed, getting entanglement to work right may be the biggest barrier to quantum computing currently.

Or they'll sell the "anonymized data", including calculated bra sizes.

This is a pretty invasive move on Comcast's part. Only the lawyers will win this one.

The question isn't an abstract application of law. The question is:

How do we prevent abuses from the police?

There are no barriers to how humans get "replaced" by AI. Are we here to benefit humanity or benefit tech bro stock prices?

The whole marketing campaign behind AI was targeted at CEOs to cut their labor costs. This makes them salivate like Pavlov's dogs.

Did the marketing appeal in a "work smarter, not harder" way? No. It was aimed at laying off huge swaths of workers. Not just worker bees, but the creatives in coding, systems management, development, but also other worker bees.

Not everyone needs creativity in their work, although it helps.

People now pump their own fuel in most states. You now walk up to a checkout and scan your own stuff. You order at a screen at McDonalds. Heaven forbid walking into a Starbucks and buying a coffee at the counter.

All of these are small cuts, and ultimately, fealty to the stock price on any given day. Job creation through AI isn't quite the goal. Lowered cost-of-goods is the goal, and the goal of capitalism in general. Do the profits filter down to worker bees? Unlikely.

Take Internet search as an example. AI engines seek to trap the thousand results and deliver you a neat package of "an answer" even if it's wrong. Any stupid AI engine can deliver believable results, subverting the thousand others that have the same answers-- perhaps authoritative, even trustable result.

Yep. Trust is built.

1. Rapidly iterative and successive models, all of them looking like dot-zero problem children do not imbue trust.

2. Rapid inter-cross dealing tech companies, all fighting with each other for dominance using the dot-zero madness does not imbue trust.

3. Models that fight each other, jump barriers and hack into companies at will, does not engender trust.

4. Digesting rivers, streams, farmland, for data centers whose parts can't even be purchased, does not build trust.

5. Creating turf wars between the models of different countries does not earn trust.

6. Creating incredible parts shortages and pumping component profits does not become trustworthy for supply chain users.

7. Bozos like Sam Altman and his merry-go-round of allies makes many people very queasy.

8. Jamming Co-Pilot down the throats of users, changing ToS to fit more mad infiltration goals to the desktop does not make people want to trust Microsoft, specifically.

9. Inability to show that AI helps, rather than lays off workers does not build trust.

The man is a fool, and so are those that become hypnotized by early success, ignoring pretty frightening failures in AI and the chains of monopoly grabs that are going with it, not to mention data center densities that are clearly unsupportable, financed by pump-and-dump Wall Street fans.

Humanity? Did you say humanity? War, even tech turf wars, leave many suffering humans in their wake. That didn't used to be true; computers were enablers, not *disablers*.