solumunus
Joined 783 karma
- solumunusTry the same with Perplexity?
- This. I’m able to be more productive for long hours more consistently than before. The occasions where I’m engineering for 8 solid hours are much more frequent now, and I’m certainly more tired. Almost all of my time is now dedicated to problem solving and planning, the LLM executes and I sit there thinking. Not everyone’s brain or project is well suited for this, but for me as a personality combined with the way my product is structured, it’s a total game changer.
- It’s really incredible how quickly people take things for granted.
- After enough time, exposure and improvement of the technology I don’t think the public will know or care. There will be generations born into a world full of AI art who know no better and don’t share the same nostalgia as you or I.
- 30% is feasible to me.
- Aren’t we then just nullifying the productivity gains that could be had from the technology though? Obviously some people want this, they want AI to be less competitive with human labour, but don’t we just fall behind other nations who don’t tax that way and allow maximum productivity gains in all the AI consuming businesses?
- No it’s not. It’s not inevitable that we get super intelligence, or even regular intelligence AGI. Even if we did, the cost of building, running and maintaining a robot to do manual jobs - I would argue this will never be cheaper than paying humans to do the same thing.
- Of course, as long as the tax is progressive. Custodians of assets almost all charge an annual feel on unrealised gains, it’s hardly a foreign concept…
- I’m not sure why all these economists bother arguing theory when obviously they should just go to you for the solutions. It’s all so simple afterall.
- > One way of taxing those companies would be to tax AI producers based on revenue, not profits.
Why?
- Yes, that’s how a software business works. The OP seemed to be talking about how we need to reform tax due to worker replacement. Everyone is talking past each other.
- They’re referring to the comment that they’re replying to, which talks about capital gains tax in an entirely different context to how you referenced software ownership.
- We’ll see. I don’t understand how anyone can view this as an inevitably in the short/medium term, yet that’s how a lot of people are talking. There’s really nothing to suggest this change is imminent.
- > Growth is not a must have for an economy, as long as it is sustainable, so even if it is a problem, which is highly arguable, it’s not really a problem like you’re positing.
If the economy doesn’t grow then you can’t service your debt without ever more cuts and/or tax raises. The other option is printing money to pay the debt, which will lead to inflation. I really want to hear your argument as to why this isn’t a problem in European economies? Unfortunately the system in many ways has presumption of growth built into it. There are no free lunches.
- Do you really think the creative or intellectual element of programming is the tapping of keys? I don't understand this at all. I enjoy solving problems and creating elegant solutions. I'm spending less time tapping keys and more time engineering solutions. If tapping keys is the most fun part for you, then that's fine! But let's not pretend THAT is the critical part of software engineering. Not to mention, it's not all or nothing. The options aren't writing code or not writing code. You can selectively not write any boring code and write 100% of the bits you find interesting or care about. If an LLM is failing to deliver what is in my minds eye then I simply step in and make sure the code is quality... I'm doing more and better software engineering, that's why I'm happy, that's the bit that scratches my itch.
- Oof.
- So why is not intelligence when I ask an LLM to solve a problem, and it proceeds to review code, search external documentation and write a solution, test it and iterate until the problem is solved? It seems very much like we we do. It seems like the difference to you guys is “hard to define magic that we can’t explain / it just is different”.
- Having marginally better models is not winning the race. Their models are good but their products are bad, or at least not the best. They aren’t winning in adoption and this is currently a market share battle.
I can argue that Firefox is marginally better than Chrome but that doesn’t mean Firefox is winning the race does it?
- I think not letting children get barraged with misinformation and foreign propaganda might help them.