andrewmutz

Apple gets a free pass on this website. If Google or Microsoft did the same thing, the torches and pitchforks would be out.

But instead the Apple fanboys will be out in force to tell us why actually its a good thing for Apple to leave parts of the OS insecure.

Training a model requires labels training data. Getting up and running with an LLM just requires a prompt.

I agree that a good model will outperform an LLM, but the LLM is so much faster/easier to build. That’s the usual tradeoff.

But why are they mad? Why do they ever encounter such games? I interact with Steam daily and before AI vibecoding there were plenty of garbage games out there.

I have no reason to seek them out. The only reason I would ever encounter "Leverage Real Estate Simulator" is because people are "outraged" about it.

Who cares about steam entries for bad games? Who is it hurting?

Look what is happening to the attempts to build AI data centers. The only thing democrats and republicans can agree on is that building AI data centers should be stopped.

It could actually be fun if done right.

The worst way to do it would be to have people randomly having their characters farming stuff automatically with AI, and users have no way of telling who is AI and who isnt.

But there are plenty of times where a player would love something in the game that was smarter than an NPC, but less important than another user. It would be fun to fill out your raid group or party with a few automated players when you can't fill it for real. Or be able to summon an AI controlled character to duel any time you wanted to practice. It would have to be managed by blizzard and the AI characters would need to be visually distinguished in game, of course.

Well at least in this particular case, it was the same engineers on the team. He specifically said he tried getting UX people to vibe code things and the results didnt work

Why are you saying he got rid of engineers? Did you watch the talk?

Why does it sound like layoffs? If you keep the team size the same and use the productivity increase to deliver more business value, how is that layoffs?

I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment expressed in this post. Our attention is extremely valuable (both to us and to advertisers), and consumers today broadly squander it.

For consumer digital products, the only business model that seems to work is advertising, because consumers are cheap and refuse to pay money for software. But the result is that they instead trade something far more valuable for the software, which is their attention.

The products that get built, as a result, are supremely well-engineered to attract and retain attention, to the detriment of their users. Most of the "news" that reaches us these days is not at all an attempt to actually educate us about the state of the world. Instead its just a collection of inflammatory and enraging facts that are chosen to optimize for engagement (to hold your attention)

In theory, someone could rebuild an ecosystem where people stopped squandering their attention and monetized it with money, but this would require consumers to stop chronically undervaluing their time and overvaluing their money.

Printing money causes inflation and inflation causes increasing interest rates. It is possible to enter a positive-feedback cycle, and has happened to countries before.

I'm not predicting that this will happen, but we do need to take the debt seriously and not assume we will be able to just print money to get rid of it.

Can't I just point my camera at an AI generated image? And it will get the stamp of authenticity?

I don't understand why you think old people would have to move. They have the ability to access the equity in their home at any time through HELOCs or mortgages. If they own a house that shoots up 1M in value, they have just had a massive windfall that they can access through financing to pay the taxes associated with that windfall.

Multiple good things would happen without prop 13:

People would move more instead of being locked in to a low effective property tax.

The tax burden would be much fairer: instead of the police and schools being funded by newcomers, everyone would be contributing their fair share to fund the city, instead of the longest tenure residents mooching off the rest of us.

Unproductive use of land would be discouraged. If a tract became highly desirable, it would be expensive to let it sit in an unproductive form

Cities could raise taxes as high as their residents wanted them to be, instead of being limited by the opinions of non-residents. Some people want to have better funded police and schools, and local government would actually be allowed to deliver that. Citizens who didnt want to live in expensive cities could vote with their feet to cheaper towns.