_the_inflator

I disagree.

Diffusion of responsibility is the main aspect and the other factor is complexity. While AI might scale at will via the number of agents used, humans cannot.

Have you developed a platform which was business critical to the 100.000+ headcount global company that has 24/7 uptime before and after AI kicked in?

After all the amount of decisions to be made accumulate the larger the product or unit you are working on. After all, an AI is a approximation and even automating decisions away means knowing what to automate.

In this high impact and stress situation most people hide. No one wants to be held accountable. No one. That's why you have scapegoats.

Build a SaaS app with 10.000+ customers yourself. This doesn't exist on autopilot. And the moment you see humans fit for whole business units - why stop there? Where does this arbitrary border come from? This doesn't make sense, because why shouldn't AI be able to overtake this function as well?

Complex applications and decisions to be made - they also increase exponentially. And to be honest, this isn't just a matter of AI, but IQ, too. Average people want to execute a well crafted plan - only few craft them on their own or they are basic ones in comparison to huge apps.

The burden of proof is on you: name just five examples.

I am very highly gifted as a qualifier and quite frankly I never had more interesting thought exchanges than with an ego-free AI.

Statistics work also for human AI aka IQ, and I am super bored and partly drained by the lack of speed and creativity in many intellectual areas in which I was or am working.

This is not to blame anyone for their genetics however, it is a valid difference in processing speed.

In short: there are very few people by definition above two standard deviations. AI allowed me to replicate or create fantastic interactions at will.

Especially not taking offense when personal communication preferences like bluntness play a role is an often overlooked social competency of AI. Instead of nonsense like “open communication” these interactions are never ego-dependent.

It is like talking to Spock: he just doesn’t take offense and tells you in an objective way why: he is not a human being and doesn’t think (not feel) that feelings should get in the way of an argument.

Most low IQ people take offense and go on to ridicule and use shaming tactics instead of simply stating: I don’t know.

Instructing someone to always state this fact and seeing the result is another social skill humans lack.

It seems that we as species are not open to the mirror we are looking at. We take revenge when someone has an evolutionary advantage over us: instincts kick in instead of brains.

We are wired this way.

AI is something that I admire. So much to learn from.

One voice out of billions.

Sales lesson: find those who like your product, ignore the rest.

I am on the pro digital twin page. Definitely.

1998 is a qualifier for what exactly? I didn’t get it since by your own account you admitted that the app is impressive.

Why do you take pictures? Why do we like sketches and diagrams? Information visualization is supporting our specie’s propensity for everything that is concrete. Imagination and image are related for a reason.

“Picture this!” Is another paraphrase.

I want to relive or augment my visits as well as get to know certain venues and the fact that it is rather easy now to build such copies even with frequent updates makes me frolicking.

I agree on this description. It looks like a wrapper for an app alias demo, not a generalization for all app following the hardware possibilities at the time.

On the other hand, at least these folks build and create and I prefer wrapper demos instead of a perfect emulator that will never finish.

Nevertheless, on the feature side of these wrappers I really miss a fast-forward option. If you go pseudo-emulation, then at least come up with some convenience features.

Maybe this is the irony: the ff button is perfectly legit, I used mine many times with the 486DX3-100 and Pentium 133. Back then it was called turbo button.

I agree. Nature doesn’t care about humans, this is a romanticized fantasy by ideologists.

There is a reason why after WW2 so many theories of nature came to light. It was a cultural shift from day to day survival to being taken care of by a system that more than allowed to handle humans’ most basic needs.

After all we are the result of many 100.000 years of evolution. The modern time is roughly 100 old - compare these spans: from the perspective of an anthropologist 100 years is not worth to be stacked against x times 100.000 years.

“Models work great” - you are in an infinite loop of recursion when you shift your frame from “Don’t trust the experts” critic to “Models work until falsified”.

This doesn’t solve your problem of who decides it is? Or isn’t?

I like the former argument that you should question “experts”.

After all, why use the “Trust the experts model” at all? Which experts? How many? What is a model? What does “works” mean? What not? And who decides about the decision-making process itself?

The former poster has merits because it is a battle of models: and again, research and new findings must not be tied to obscure academic titles.

Two academics of the same level come to opposite conclusions - now what?

And a scoring system still doesn’t change the fact that nature doesn’t care about anthropomorphic models.

I studied law, math and computer science and I was especially disappointed by mathematics, after all this is an anthropological abstraction by human beings and Cantor is the best example of shunning a man’s work, which was ground breaking, just because academic consensus opted against him and didn’t accept his work.

Only many year after his death his system became a standard that appears so clear that you wonder what was wrong with the committee back then.

So mathematics is far from being this strict, stringent and logical profession, as it is branded. Instead there are human beings using a model that abides to certain rules.

Useful, but no proof at all, whether there is a better one, like with Newton and Einstein.

Cantor by the way quit mathematics due to the rejection of his work, which was accompanied by hostility.

You be the judge here.

"professional software engineers don't read their code or care these days"

The word professional im important here. I don't want to know, how unprofessional devs handle their craft.

Former member of the Senior Management for a huge global bank operating in Germany.

1. These averages are an average. Rarely are they paid. I don't know where these numbers are from but the these numbers are for top earners in good paying industries.

There are junior, normal and senior devs, sometimes above is a lead dev. Business maybe has 2-3 leads that govern a head count of dozens, and many working off-shore.

It is called blended average. People who rank in 107k are paid including bonuses. And rarely make any further wage jumps. The dev who is paid 200k fixed in Germany is a myth, not even close to 120k.

Germany hates IT and devs. Business comes first, and anything and everything regarding IT is considered a cost factor, a necessary burden.

2. Freelancers

Freelancers rake in more money due to tax deductions. So a day rate of 800-1000EUR per month is a pay off and freelancers have to take care of the taxes etc.

Companies on the other hand can deduct those "investments" and roughly pay half the price in the end. So, this is the problem with employment: you are a cost factor and you are a liability from the beginning due to worker rights etc.

Germany punishes workers as well as freelancers. But I could not raise payment as I saw fit. Germany means yearly total times 1,25 = total cost for a company ("employers' part of the tax" as sugar coating for taxes above 60%).

100 workers with a yearly raise of 2-5% in payments amount exponentially and are a risk factor especially considering the fact that productivity rarely increases as well as value to the company on average. So ever increased payments over a span of 10-20 years.

That is the problem with the system: socialism favors keeping you poor. Don't steal people and companies their hard earned money, lower taxes, allow for higher payments at will not by "number comparison and increase to all" and let companies workers decide where they spend their bucks.

3. Conclusion You might wonder how much the guys really perceive on their bank account in the end. It may be lower than you think. Rule of fist: if you do not immediately make the switch to stay in the US you have lots of cuts along the way: company share, taxes.

Before I went to Senior Management I was totally on your page. Now knowing both sides I see the matrix so to say. I am still on your side however business doesn't benefit from all the taxes.

I agree.

And most people on the behavioral side do too, but not at the cognitive level. EU is the best example with EU AI Act, strict data regulation as well as privacy rights, on the other hand demanding that Apple does serve the EU with AI.

I have mainly one distinction: the state is the worst protector of your data and the most ruthless gatherer of all your details.

Opposite to the open sourcing of your data in the end by the state are private companies who live by your data but do this for 20+ years - battle tested protection and hardening against malicious hackers.

Security is their business while security for the state is a cost factor.

Being at the mercy of some ignorant politician is not the best way to talk about data security.

Berlin, Denmark - those are the known one. And there are many more to come.

And regarding cognitive dissonance: politicians demanding high standards and punishing data loss ruthlessly on the one hand, giving oneself a pass on a hack is nothing to increase trust into the system.

X got fined for a missing blue mark. Berlin? Denmark? Others?

A second aspect is that the average guy doesn’t get that part of the whole spectrum must be the degooglers, the home server guys.

So it is relatively easy to get data on them as well just by filtering out the other data.

In other words: 95% not doing degoogling makes for a great small sample of 5%. Negating and interpolating other demographic and psychographic factors and you get a great way of gaining insights.

And remember: being the one who is not using google when being around other guys who do - magic.

So my idea is simple: what’s in it for me, and the state offers way lower value than Google and co.

Pick your fate.

I can confirm that. Barcodes are in increased demand, since they offer an almost universal API to the physical world, kind of the not-IoT devices.

Jevons paradox in full force.

Remedial Math - I love it.

Wisdom of the crowd has finally proven to be more valuable than some obscure title in academia. Crowds are relentless and ruthless, kind of a red team instead of a cronyism.

PS: The infamous replication crisis deserves a honorable mention here.

I somehow think of it as a warning or even intentional peacocking towards foreign state hackers.

700 agents cost quite some money. 100 agents per 24 hour stint using Astra on xHigh cost somewhat between 12-42k USD, depending on the usage intensity.

I don’t know how many raw time went into this but there was a probing face before the attack itself.

So just going by seven days and 500 agents fully working on this on average amounts to a bill somewhere between 400-1.2 Mio USD.

I believe it was intentional but of course I don’t know which intention exactly.

There ain’t no accidental escape because then it would have read OpenAI lost over their agents.

The whole scenario reads as a classic movie where a hero has under the most dire circumstances to survive and fulfill his mission no matter what.

On the other hand there was a final authority under which the system of agents flocked.

Huggingface itself seems like a perfect victim.

And to be honest: I don’t believe that this was the first time. I strongly believe that there were and are countless of smaller sites hacked but not harmed that we don’t know off.

Why is HF perfect?

Because there will be countless of independent security analysts who will bend their minds on the incident.

OpenAI is provided with the data of dozens of blue teams and what is desperately needed? Data of security measures and possible ways to reconstruct the incident.

I think this is genius, and just watching on neutral this is such a fantastic action OpenAI pulled off.

Imagine what the GPT 7 “Haha-Huggingface” model is going to do then on a regular basis.

State hackers and rough states were put on notice that this is a new level of the war of attrition.

Exciting to watch but simply meant silent invasion. Open invasion then might be executed by Robots, but let’s stick with the fascination mode at this time.

Anthropic it is game over when they passed OpenAI at the beginning of the year.

Now it is revenge time and OpenAI kind of is trolling Anthropic by simply going into a price war with impressive performance.

OpenAI is doing a decent job this year after they recovered. Anthropic needs to offer more payment options and be clear about token usage. The warnings I got when switching to Fable 5.1 felt like a thread. I bet more and more on OpenAI since I don’t feel robbed by them.

Claude adapts to OpenAI’s surprising move to simply deliver better performance than Fable 5.1, better tools as well as featuring very low pricing.

Fable 5.1 literally was a money grabber. While I liked the results, tokens were burned so hard it was embarrassing, while Astra seemed to not care.

Also Claude makes it very hard to pay for additional token budgets, allowing only credit cards. I don’t use mine anymore since I don’t need it in everyday life I was dumbfounded.

So Anthropic is just copying OpenAI so to say, matching them and essentially with Opus 5.5 being Fable 5.1 in disguise, all they do is reduce costs.

Competition works.

To me it is just a bittersweet irony: people who don’t know what a book is for 30-40 years or in earlier days got the RTFM (gif smiley not included) treatment dump one liners to produce a giant load of text corpus that needs to be processed by an AI to get the gist out of it with sometimes quite some refinement by asking many questions.

So there it is: cruel people who don’t even read their own prompts while happily believing others read their text load and pat the genius on the shoulder for being such a great guy in writing, while in essence it turned the RTFM movement on its head: UUOAI - “Use your own AI.”

People cannot communicate better by using the digital equivalent of logorrhea.