That video was pretty janky, I thought for sure it wouldn’t be direct from Kawasaki but yeah…
Someone fed the concept into an AI video generator, proclaimed a 2050 target date, so absolutely far enough away this will be forgotten by the time everyone realizes that this was zero actual effort towards anything.
So now AI lets marketing folks make their completely going nowhere idea into a substantial concept video casually…
I had been planning to, but being lazy about trying to enable my IDE setup but was giving it the benefit of the doubt. Your feedback resonates with how much I end up fighting auto-complete/auto-correct in normal language and seeing it potentially ruin current code completion (which sometimes I have to fight, but on balance it helps more than it annoys). I suppose I’ll still give it a shot, but with even more skepticism. I suppose maybe it can at least provide an OK draft of API documentation… Maybe sometimes…
On the ‘vibe coding’, on the cases I’ve seen detailed, it seems they do something that, to them, is a magical outcome from technologies that intimidated them. However, it’s generally pretty entry level stuff for those familiar with the tools of the trade, things you can find already done dozens of time on github almost verbatim, with very light bespoke customization. Of course there is a market for this, think of all the ‘no code’/‘low code’ things striving to make approachable very basic apps that just end up worse than learning to code. As a project manager struggles to make a dashboard out of that sort of sensibility, a dashboard that really has no business being custom but tooling has fostered the concept that everyone has a snowflake dashboard, it’s a pain. But maybe AI can help them generate their dashboard. Of course, to be a human subjected to the workflows those PMs dream up is a nightmare. Bad enough already at my work there are hundreds of custom issue fields, a dozen issue types, and 50 issue states with maddening project to project unique workflows to connect the meaning of all this, don’t like AI emboldening people to customize further.
The thing about ‘vibe coding’ is when they get stuck and they get confused/frustrated about why the LLM stopped getting them what they want. One story was someone vibe coding up a racing game. He likely marveled as his vision materialized. From typing prose without understanding how to code he got some sort of 3D game with cars and tracks and controls. This struck him as incredibly difficult otherwise, but reachable through ‘vibe coding’. Then he wanted to add tire marks when the player did something, maybe on a hard turn) and it utterly couldn’t do it. After all the super hard stuff, why could the LLM not do this conceptually much simpler thing? Ultimately spitting out that the person needed to develop the logic himself (claiming it was refraining to do it because it would be better for him to learn, but I’m wagering that’s the generated text after repeated attempts to generate code that the LLM just could not do).
I occasionally check what various code generators will do if I don’t immediately know the answer is almost always wrong, but recently it might have been correct, but surprisingly convoluted. It had it broken down into about 6 functions iterating through many steps to walk it through various intermediate forms. It seemed odd to me that such a likely operation was quite so involved, so I did a quick Internet search, ignored the AI generated result and saw the core language built-in designed to handle my use case directly. There was one detail that was not clear in the documentation, so I went back to the LLM to ask that question and it gave the exact wrong answer.
I am willing to buy that with IDE integration or can probably have much richer function completion for small easy stuff I know to do and save some time, but I just haven’t gotten used to the idea of asking for help on things I already know how to do.
I’ve got mixed feelings on the CHIPS act.
It was basically born out of a panic over a short term shortage. Like many industry observers accurately stated that the shortages will subside long before any of the CHIPS spending could even possibly make a difference. Then the tech companies will point to this as a reason not to spend the money they were given.
That largely came to pass, with the potential exception of GPUs in the wake of the LLM craze.
Of course, if you wanted to give the economy any hope for viable electronics while also massively screwing over imports, this would have been your shot. So it seems strategically at odds with the whole “make domestic manufucating happen” rhetoric.
That’s compatible with a lack of faith in profitable growth opportunity.
So far they have gone big with what I’d characterize as more evolutionary enhancements to tech. While that may find some acceptance, it’s not worth quite enough to pay off the capital investment in this generation of compute. If they overinvest and hope to eventually recoup by not upgrading, they are at severe risk of being superseded by another company that saved some expenditure to have a more modest, but more up to date compute infrastructure.
Another possibility is that they predicted a huge boom of a other companies spending on Azure hosting for AI stuff, and they are predicting those companies won’t have the growth either.
They don’t have to take it away, they can just set up the backend to blackhole those requests. So presence of the report issue facility does not imply they actually will ever even see the issue.
Tech companies were in that boat in the late 90s as well.
The dot com bust deflated it somewhat, but somehow the industry got right back to it within a couple of years.
Option C, just no thanks for the same thing as TikTok in general.
I work with some Intel folks… The place just seems terribly mismanaged and the tech world would probably benefit if the technical folks would work elsewhere.
3840x2440, 2560x1440, and 1920x1200. Wayland and all of them are probably just 60hz screens.
Yeah, I strongly suspect there was a camp within Microsoft that was 100% pushing for ‘rolling release’ model for the OS versus another traditionalist camp that said there would be new major upgrades. Further, I bet rather than reconciling those perspectives, they just let both camps continue on under their own assumption, until eventually the traditionalists won out and got ‘Windows 11’, finalizing which way the company was going to actually go.
Note that my three monitor setup with an nvidia GPU actually works better in Linux.
Mainly because when I plug the laptop in, I have to turn the third monitor off and on again to make it ‘wake up’, but in Linux, all three reliably start displaying.
I’ll admit to some ‘asterisk’ to that.
So a developer evangelist said “because Windows 10 is the last version of Windows, we’re all still working on Windows 10”. So the media ran with the most intuitive interpretation of that language and expanded on it and declared that Microsoft was basically changing to a rolling release model. Note that folks say “he meant latest, not last”.
Meanwhile, Microsoft’s formal lifecycle statement said, from the onset, that it wasn’t going to be supported in 10 years.
However, Microsoft did nothing to clarify the rampant coverage. So I’m still on the side of “the popular impression among people was eternally supported rolling release”. Just acknowledging that, formally, they did designate 10 the same way they had designated previous versions.
I suppose the question would be the alternative.
Note the devices actively discouraging offline save is a huge asset to schools, since kids screw up a lot, forget their devices and need loaners to get through a day and such. Extra bonus if the device can’t be too fun, to avoid them being overly used at home and get broken more.So Chromebook is desirable because they suck so much.