Programming for me has always been about fully understanding every part of the code and attending to ALL the detail. Vibe coding with corresponding hallucinations goes against so much of what we learned over the years. I bet the average vibe codes also writes no tests! For me, unless the software is verified, it's useless.

Awesome... not often something as interesting as that is posted on /. or anywhere else for that matter.

I also have used llm assisted coding and I'm not sure I agree. superficially it seems very fast but then coding using modern languages and libraries (I use Rust and ofc cargo) is also extremely fast these days. when I use LLMs I often have to spend significant time correcting errors made by the LLM and I estimate the time gain to be negative in these circumstances.

admittedly in certain cases , for example building boiler plate to get database rows into structures, LLM coding is spectacularly faster than my manual effors because I struggle at repetitive detail work.

Strongly suspect researching the psychological dynamics at play here might illuminate the development of the world's major religions.There certainly seems to be a tendency at play here that's inherent to humanity generally.

I never ceases to amaze me, the lack of intelligence or basic competence amongst people who reach the highest office!

and by the way non-competes (whch is not what is being described) are not legal in the UK.

wtf has this got to do with California? Article is talking about deep mind in London.

Inside youtube's world of fake videos.

They were an amazing company up to around 1994 ish Id say. After that, utter garbage. Bit like HP, once great now not!

i remember when i worked there, how crazy irritating their software was. AIX needed a million patches every time you wanted to do anything, and the patch process seemed to be designed to inflict pain. WebSphere was a smelly pile of shit then too, complexityfor the sake of it (this was the mid 90's). Thank god for linux and open source is all I can say!

learn a thing or two. No one demanded the US defend europe, the US CHOOSE to spend the money; and in fact it wasn't defending Europe,the US was defending the US with bases in Europe (i was around when there were extremely vigorous demos against US bases in the UK.

Since Trump started his term by (at least appearing to) treat staunch allies as almost enemies, I have expected many unintended consequences. I am in a way looking forward to seeing them unfold over time (more entertaining than the media these days). I expect this to be the amongst the first of many.

So, your assertion doesn't carry much in the way of precedent. There are literally myriad laws designed to protect individuals from the asymmetric resources stacked up against them. If each individual had the same resources as a major corp with which to fight their temptations, then I would agree. But individuals don't. Societies have generally decided that the callous "you're on your own and by the way, we're going to arrange an enormous number of resources that work with your psychology and against your long term interests to undermine your efforts" is not what is wanted nor good. Take for example financial services - there's a long history of exploiting individuals for profit using techniques which have been outlawed (for example ponzi schemes). Presumable you're based in the US where there's a strong theme of "regulations always bad", and "individuals are on their own and should take responsibility" - not all countries of cultures agree with that point of view and I would suggest that human history and progress doesn't support that POV either. Anyway, comment already too long, stop.

you're ignoring the elephant in the room. The entire consumer society was designed to encourage people not to save. Banks spend literally billions encouranging the opposite - to take on credit card debt to buy the shiney things, pay 20% of your income in interest every month but that doesn't matter so long as you have the shiney things. Its another example of corporate irresponsibility. Then you blame the individual for falling for it?

As with all statistics .. there is far more to the picture than you suggest.

Google's AI research is done in London, for example. Just because the companies are listed on the US stock exchange and their headquarters are in the US, doesn't in any way show where the actual work is happening.

The UK suffers from a cultural snobbery towards technology that tends to direct UK capital away from such investments, it does not suffer from a shortage of high quality research (both commercial and private), funded from abroad, or for that matter talented individuals.