charlieflowers

I guess maybe it is like Agent Smith from the Matrix. Nothing particularly detestable about the individual, but what makes it distasteful is that same individual is in millions of places.

I mean it feels different when it is happening to me than i felt about it happening to them

Yeah. "Glorified autocomplete" might be all the human brain is too. "Glorified autocomplete" can do an amazing number of things, including perhaps pass the Turing test and perhaps ... "think".

"Glorified autocomplete" is meant to describe the _underlying mechanism_, but unfortunately it also sounds like one of the things LLMs are actually used for, so it gives the mistaken impression that the claim is all they are good for is a component inside an editor application.

All my life, when I would think back to what mill towns went through when they all closed (something I did not live through), all my naive outsider brain could arrive at was, "Yeah, but those were just grunge jobs, humans were freed up to do better stuff."

And perhaps the same thing is now happening to me. It feels different, but maybe the same thing is true.

Is the high barrier to entry essential though? Is there something about the nix domain that would mean any solution would have as high a barrier to entry? Or is it something they could have simplified greatly, and just never did? (Asking as an outsider, I've always been curious about this).

Resolved it was on my end

Edit: Resolved now it was on my end. > fyi not working for me

Surprised it is not "Super Intelligence of America"

That tension is doing real work.

I still remember how hard I was struck by the scene in The Orville, where someone from another planet hears a Dolly Parton song playing and asks who it is. He goes on to say, "She speaks with the might of a hundred soldiers!"

She did. She is one of our species' great poets.

But do we really need a paradigm shift in how we express the concept of a paradigm shift? It's not like the meaning of the words expired.

But inference costs scale per task whereas platform services like postgres typically amortize across tasks. If you are selling tasks done by inference, then compute is part of your COGS and it scales per task.

Originally I replied here that I thought you were both missing the point (but I was wrong).

I wrote: It has a garbage collector and goroutines, so clearly it is not trying to be a systems programming language.

Then ... I saw that it does indeed pitch itself as a systems programming language. So, I guess you both are right.

If Gossamer were to drop that claim, then I'd say it looks impressive to me. I have often wanted this particular mix of language features.

The language choices demonstrate excellent taste though.