lad

Yeah, I eventually found a Wikipedia page about Amazon Game Studios, they still exist and make games, and it looks like they only make mediocre stuff even when they have chances to make something interesting (like King of Meat, that seems to be a well received game, but has awful name, is too pricey, and is almost unknown, making the online too small)

No, not for pointing out

Yeah, I had in mind their office they changed every now and then to break compatibility with FOSS office, afaik this is not the only thing they did like that, but support for running old software usually was decent, true

A bit ironic when Microsoft struggles because someone else keep breaking compatibility. Although I would prefer it to keep trying because that would have been more choice and competition in the mobile OS land

competitor being so unimportant they can’t give things away

What?

Besides, I think part of the issue is that you argue with different people as if they were the same people

Good point, I wonder if elasticity of demand will be affected by the AI bubble bursting (I expect there will be a recession and demand will get less elastic, bit I’m no economist)

I still think there is some communication issue, but I re-read your original comment and I am quite lost about what your point was: you say Valve is monopoly BUT it’s not evil (from another thread you linked) and you don’t propose to dismantle it. So, what should the readers do with the newly acquired knowledge?

If you want to warn, then warn directly, if you want to call to action, do so. If you want people to just think for themselves, you will get nothing except people thinking you fail to make a point and arguing with you because they came up with that result by thinking for themselves

Yeah, I can’t answer your question either, because I find it may be either hard or impossible to come up with an answer

They seem to ask how to phrase the same thing in such a way that you can’t come and reply that their tone is condescending.

Much passive, very aggression, I find it hard to side with people this snarky :(

So, ceo has 20× the average in their company, wow

What did they make?

I have A1 and A2 level in a couple of non-first languages, technically I can speak those, realistically I don’t and will not be able to communicate something more complex than ‘here, take a look’

So I don’t agree with your absolutistic stance

Yeah, I understand that this case doesn’t require a QA, but in the wild companies seem to increasingly think that developers are necessary (yet), but QA are surely not

It’s not even bad engineers, it’s just squeezing of productivity as dry as possible, as I see it

Yeah, if only QA vere not the first ‘replaced’ by AI 😠

I have a feeling that their test case is also a bit flawed. Trying to get index_value instead of index value is something I can imagine happening, and asking an LLM to ‘fix this but give no explanation’ is asking for a bad solution.

I think they are still correct in the assumption that output becomes worse, though

You can transpile from C to Malbolge and then run it (this will probably take forever for most of C programs). I thought it can be used for obfuscation, and sure enough Wiki already states that:

Hisashi Iizawa et al. also proposed a guide for programming in Malbolge for the purpose of obfuscation for software protection

No thinking is not the same as no actions, we had bots in games for decades and that bots look like they act reasonably but there never was any thinking.

I feel like ‘a lot of agency’ is wrong as there is no agency, but it doesn’t mean that an LLM in a looped setup can’t arrive to these actions and perform them. It doesn’t require neither agency, nor thinking

It’s kinda good but also reads a bit like

sorry we got caught we never intended to

Yeah those also can’t think, and it will not change soon

The real problem though is not if LLM can think or not, it’s that people will interact with it as if it can, and will let it do the decision making even if it’s not far from throwing dice

They have a few good point in all of that, but some are really out of this world:

Demonstrate that one junior plus AI can match a small team’s output.

Yeah, that’s going to fare well for both an employee and an employer. Not hiring juniors is the real problem and it’s not juniors who should get pushed even more to solve it