treespace8

For me it breaks the rule of "Network of trust".

Software works because someone is accountable for it. Pair Programming, Test Driven Development, and now Agentic coding all to one degree or another damage the network of trust.

- Pair Programming (There is no one person accountable for the change.) - Test Driven Development (The test pass, so my software is good) - Agentic Coding (My prompt was good, so my software is good)

AI is great for software development... As long as you review and understand each change it makes. Because YOU are going to be held accountable for what the software does.

How does the AI know something is broken?

But what have we built on top of software so far? My first thought is that we have made new communities. But most of them are of much poorer quality than what we had in person.

I hope we start to rebuild in person connections again with this technology.

Like all automations it's not 100% perfect, and they all require a human to monitor them.

Turning over a problem to a LLM as solved means we won't be able to do the task anymore. Because we will never learn how. We will not know that the LLM has made a mistake, and will be unable to fix it ourselves.

Right now we can correct the LLM, as the years go on we will become unable to do so.

I find at the heart of all this AI slop is a deep sadness at the loss of connection. It used to be when I read something, or saw something that I knew it was real. Someone created it for me to experience. It was a form of connection.

But now I'm no longer certain. Unless I really know the source, have met them in person, or seen them talk I just don't know if what I'm trying to connect with is real.

Even then when using AI just for myself I limit it to building tools, looking for errors. But when it comes to full blown generation, I just don't like what it makes.

I feel like an outlier in all of this. But isn't this just more AI slop? How is this different from text generation or image generation?

Like many people I have used AI to generate crap I really don't care about. I need an image. Generate something like, whatever. Great hey a good looking image! No that's done I can do something I find more interesting to do.

But it's slop. The image does not fit the context. Its just off. And you can tell that no one really cared.

This isn't good.

I'm a skeptic, because Self Driving is sold as a digital chauffeur.

Not 99% of a chauffeur, 100%. (or 99.99999%)

The roll out of this is clearly limited by the number of remote employees that are filling in the 1%.

For me AI has given that back to me. I'm back to just getting stuff built, not getting stuck for long when working in a new area. And best of all using AI for cleanup! Generate some tests, refactor common code. The boring corporate stuff.

I'm using Claude code to help me learn Godot game programming.

One interesting thing is that Claude will not tell me if I'm following the wrong path. It will just make the requested change to the best of its ability.

For example a Tower Defence game I'm making I wanted to keep turret position state in an AStarGrid2D. It produced code to do this, but became harder and harder to follow as I went on. It's only after watching more tutorials I figured out I was asking for the wrong thing. (TileMapLayer is a much better choice)

LLMs still suffer from Garbage in Garbage out.

I wonder how the police state works into this. China spends a lot of money on internal surveillance and suppression of information.

If the belief was genuine, would this be necessary?

> big software projects I've seen succeed were down to a few inspired leaders and/or engineers who set the tone. People with emotional intelligence, tact, clear vision, ability to really gather requirements and work with the end users. Leaders who treated their staff with dignity and respect.

I completely agree. I would just like to add that this only works where the inspired leaders are properly incentivized!

After learning that the Amazon Go store was power by hundreds of people watching video because the AI could not handle it was a real eye opener for me.

Is this why Waymo is slow to expand, not enough remote drivers?

Maybe that is where we need to be focused, better remote driving?

Haven't we found that there is a limit? Math itself is an abstraction. There is always a conversion process (Turning the real world into a 1 or a 0) that has an error rate. IE 0.000000000000001 is rounded to 0.

Every automation I have seen needs human tuning in order to keep working. The more complicated, the more tuning. This is why self driving cars and voice to text still rely on a human to monitor, and tune.

Meat is magic. And can never be completely recreated artificially.