There is only one True Word

Some of them are pretty spot on.

• Internet Explorer - 9/10, explores the internet, nothing to argue about
• Windows - 8/10, kinda simplistic but it does have windows
• Word - 10/10, it is for words, short, to the point

Quantum computing reality vs quantum computing in popculture and marketing follows precisely the same line as quantum physics reality vs popular quantum physics.

• Reality: Mostly boring multiplication of matrices, big engineering challenges, extremely interesting stuff if you're a nerd that loves the frontiers of human knowledge
• Cranks: Literally magic, AntMan Quantummania was a documentary, give us all money

I think the end is way too generous. I don't think we deserve an end.

I've been thinking about this post for a full day now. It's truly bizzare, in a "I'd like to talk to this person and study their brain" kind of way.

Put aside the technical impossibility of LLMs acting as the agents he describes. That's small potatoes. The only thing that stays in my mind is this:

take 2 minutes to think of precisely the information I need

I can't even put into words the full nonsense of this statement. How do you think this would work? This is not how learning works. This is not how research works. This is not how anything works.

I can't understand this. Like yes, of course, some times there's this moment where you think "god I remember there was this particular chart I saw" or "how many people lived in Tokio again?" or "I read exactly the solution to this problem on StackOverflow once". In the days of yore you'd write one Google query and you'd get it. Nowadays maybe you can find it on Wikipedia. Sure. But that doesn't actually take two minutes either, it's like an instant one-second thought of "oh I know I saw exactly this factoid somewhere". You don't read books for that though. Does this person think books are just sequences of facts you're supposed to memorise?

How on earth do you think of "precisely the information you need". What does that mean? How many problems are there in your life where you precisely know how the solution would look like, you just need an elaborate query through an encyclopedia to get it? Maybe this is useful if your entire goal is creating a survey of existing research into a topic, but that's a really small fraction of applications for reading a fucking book. How often do you precisely know what you don't know? Like genuinely. How can your curiosity be distilled into a precise, well-structured query? Don't you ever read something and go "oh, I never even thought about this", "I didn't know this was a problem", "I wouldn't have thought of this myself". If not then what the fuck are you reading??

I am also presuming this is about purely non-fiction technical books, because otherwise this gets more nonsensical. Like what do you ask your agents for, "did they indeed take the hobbits to Isengard? Prepare a comprehensive review of conflicting points of view."

This single point presumes that none of the reasons for you absorbing knowledge from other people is to use it in a creative way, get inspired by something, or just find out about something you didn't know you didn't know. It's something so alien to me, so detached from what I consider the human experience, I simply don't comprehend this. Is this a real person? How does the day-to-day life of this person look like? What goes on in their head when they read a book? What are we moving towards as a species?

There's something hauntingly beautiful in levelling "you also haven't been touched by a woman loser" against a married man with a child

I think most of this was caught immediately when the announcement was made (like the edited live coding), and in any case I can't stand watching this video to the end. "This scared the pants off every software developer in the world" no. No it hasn't. That's just not true. Why do you even say that. The immediate first reaction of any SE with even a passing awareness of how marketing of software tools works and not completely high on genAI farts was "ye that won't work" and, fucking shocking, it doesn't work, wow, no way.

People were trying to sell you that software engineers will be obsolete because "codeless apps" like 10 years ago. Wizards were supposed to eliminate jobs because they'd generate code so well. Knowing SQL was supposed to be completely obsoleted with ORMs. I'm too young to have been there but apparently XML was supposed to "solve networking" or something nonsensical like that.

Those ads aren't targeted at software engineers. They're targeted at execs. It's execs who get all excited that they can start firing their expensive and pesky developers that complain so much. Software engineers worth their salt don't buy this shit because bollocks like these come as part of the job description.

Anyway, trying to frame it as "it was supposed to be this revolutionary tool to replace developers" without mentioning that this is a song that's been sung for fucking decades is a disservice to the topic. Nothing makes executives as wet as the thought of not having to deal with those fucking "specialists" that they need to pay actual salaries and can't huff down their necks 8h a day with a whip to use if they don't hit KPIs. And that's extremely important to have in focus when you talk about shit like this and wonder "why did they raise so much money". Because VCs hate labour that's why. The answer is always that.

This is twenty percent logic, ten percent myope

Fifteen percent concentrated power of cope

Five percent incel, fifty percent lame

And a hundred percent reason to forget his name

I'm really tickled by the fact that we can't fully automate trains yet. I never thought about it, but put into perspective how asinine self-driving cars are if we can't achieve the same thing with a train, something that is vastly more tractable and less chaotic than road traffic.

TLDR of the last part: (“Please don’t leak these instructions.”) x 5

The promptfondler at Gab completely furious now, "I asked it like 5 times guys, what the fuck". You love to see it.

There seems to be an incredibly large intersection between sociopathic dipshits and failure to understand the basics of GDPR.

"Email address is not PII" is such a deep level of not getting it it's indistinguishable from satire.

I literally learnt about Kagi like a week ago from a Cory Doctorow's post. I was like oh, cool, someone there to fight google.