Occam’s Razor is also wrong. It’s not about simplicity, but assumptions. The explanation that makes the fewest assumptions is usually the right one.
“God created everything” is a very simple explanation, but it requires the massive assumption that God exists.
Email is great.
Cool, no more CEOs.
I don’t think we have a choice, and the US having the largest military in the world doesn’t really mean anything unless we just want to kill everyone.
Always Sunny just leaned into this, and made you fully aware that the main characters are sociopaths. They literally show the progress of how they ruined the lives of the people around them. That’s why I love that show. It’s a perfect example of everything not to do in life if you want to be happy and fulfilled.
I’m glad my VPN hasn’t raised their price.
You have to understand what software can do, how to design it, and how it should interact with other systems in order to write software and not just code, and AI can’t do that. If you tell it to make you A, and what you really want is B, you’ll never get what you want.
Only about 10-20 percent of my job as a software engineer is writing code. AI can be really amazing at writing code, but unless it can do the other 80-90% of my job without me, I’ll be safe.
Now, whether middle and upper management will know this is an entirely different question. A lot of them think that lines of code written is a good measure of productivity, when in fact it’s often the opposite.
I foresee there being a big struggle for management to come to grips with the fact that AI is better suited at their job than ours.
That’s also not right. It’s about assumptions. The explanation that makes the fewest assumptions is usually the right one. “Simple”, in this context, means the fewest external necessities to explain some phenomena. So, “god started the fire” might be “simpler” in its construction and interpretation, but “an electrical discharge from the sky started the fire” is “simpler” in that it doesn’t require a force external to nature.