No, I have a friend from Madagascar where they have the same type of 'jobs' (basically classifying stuff for AI, or checking reported images to see if it's porn or worse). It is a 'good job' in the sense that it's a 'desk' job you can do at home that also signal education, so it's social value is high. It is also very 'competitive' so the pay is low and the hours to live on it approach 90/week (it's a 12h/day job)
True, but rarely you see someone grifting to the left. Each time someone get caught putting his hands, or worse, where he shouldn't, he tends to go rightward, and fast. Same thing when they are caught doing MLMs, always to the right. Even with shitcoiners, the right-wing pivot is fast once your 'racism is bad, but this antiracist coin' is done. I honestly don't know why.
Probably you have either more money, or more forgiving/powerful people on the right? Some grift to the center, but it's very rare, when libs are as powerful and rich as conservative, so I've no idea.
Sorry, i wasn't clear, my bad. You have grifters everywhere, especially in the fringe as when your audience is small, grifting is the best way to make any real amount of money. But when a grifter is caught doing something the public consider bad (SA, but sometime just being caught red-handed stealing money), he either disappear, or grift to the right. No grifter go further left is my point.
I think the internationally known examples are the Tate brothers or the Paul brothers, but among the scammers who got pardonned by trump you will mostly find people who grifted to the right. In my country it is also quite clear. Doctors caught doing weird chamanism and not helping patient? Suddenly it's "cancel culture!!1!". Your "quantum energy" bullshit is caught and proved to be a weird MLM? Cancel culture! Every fucking time.
It happened with people who used to grift for kombaya/hippies with weird chamanism and yoga. Suddenly, 911 was an inside job and Donald Trump is our savior, Q is his prophete. I shit you not, my mother Yoga ayurvedic group went from hippies that use to get scammed into buying essential oils to "open the Chakra" to weird antisemites who purchased trumpm/melania coin in less than 3 years. And we're not even in the US :/
Ah I think i understand. To paraphrase, you're saying that people that are caught tend to take refuge by more rightward grifting.
I cannot speak to your specific experience and i don't necessarily disagree. However, I do think there a potential selection bias here because by our media environment. Agree or not, the media believes that Trump is the most horrible person in the world at the moment. So there is a propensity to attack anyone that is considered allied to the right, so rightward grifters will get more aggressively exposed.
Yes, exactly, I'm not a native speaker and I have trouble explaining nuances on stuff I've thought about in my mother tongue first.
Agree with the selection bias, that one explanation. A second is that a lot of grifters who were caught now want to get pardoned, so maybe it influence their politics. And the third one is that the society as a whole shifted right, so grifters shifted right. When the pendulum will swing back, maybe grifters will also be shifting back (it doesn't match with Russell Brand/Andrew Tate timing though, but it match quite well with the podcast bro crowd and the Paul brothers).
I also think the age and money factor is also a thing (conservative have more disposable income on average, are older on average, so easier and richer targets). When you get caught grifting your audience will decrease. Concentrating on the richest/oldest is just good business.
That's because Marx was a productivist, and communism was strictly productivist until a decade ago (and still is mainly productivist nowadays).
In a lot of country political ecology used to be liberal/capitalist (save a few radical feminist like D'Eaubonne who linked environment with feminism, but it's less than a minority). Basically Blair's 'third way' but with less nuclear (for some reason, although I think this position is loosing ground in ecologist), and more electric cars.
The degrowth movement is an offshot of that ideology. Degrowth is to political ecologism what anarchism is to communism, based a very Idealist and hopeful view of humanity.
Communists and ecologists are broadly on the 'left', but rarely allied until maybe a decade ago, and again, on minor things (Communists love nuclear,as it is typically something you don't want a capitalist with 'limited liability' to take care of), and while degrowth might be close to anarchists in some way, it is very, very dishonest to put them in the same basket.
Any multiplayer game that doesn't have an integrated matchmaking have _big_ discord servers. Basically most paradox games, civ5 and civ6, probably others. All the organising that used to happen on forums now happens on discord servers
I'll have to ask my brother but that might be NBC's audio engineer decision, or even his default settings (depending on the broadcaster voice).
I'm as critical as the US as they come, in fact I just cancelled my summer trip to the Appalachia, but seeing this as censorship is reading a bit too far, simpler explanations exist (crowd noises are dimmed by audio filters)
Both? It is very likely the 'booh' were cut by the broadcaster filters. Each broadcaster (at least in my country) has a 'sound identity' (it's a literal translation, sorry) and use filters during live shows. It originally come from AM radio where your sound is _very_ compressed, to FM radio where you still have to compress it, but with more range. My state radio would have captured and diffused the 'booh' while on the music radio I used to listen to as a kid, they definitely would have been dampened (most of them would have been caught by the 'passe-haut/coupe-bas').
I listened to the US broadcast, definitely dampened, I'm not sure if it's a default filter or one that triggers with the broadcaster, it is extremely likely it isn't intentional. My Bayesian ass is 95% sure.
But it write mostly useless documentation Which take time to read and decipher.
And worse, if you are using it for public documentation, sometimes it hallucinate endpoints (i don't want to say too much here, but it happened recently to a quite used B2B SaaS).
Loop it. Use another agent (from a different company helps) to review the code and documentation and call out any inconsistencies.
I run a bunch of jobs weekly to review docs for inconsistencies and write a plan to fix. It still needs humans in the loop if the agents don’t converge after a few turns, but it’s largely automatic (I baby sat it for a few months validating each change).
That might work for hallucinations, that doesn't work for useless verbose. And the main issue is that LLM don't always distinguish useless verbose from necessary one, so even when I ask it to reduce verbose, it remove everything save a few useful comments/docstring, but some of the comments that were removed I deemed useful. Un the end I have to do the work of cutting verbose manually anyway.
It can generate useful documentation or useless documentation. It doesn't take very long to instruct the LLM to generate the documentation, and then check if it matches your understanding of the project later. Most real documentation is about as wrong as LLM-generated documentation anyway. Documenting code is a language-to-language translation task, that LLMs are designed for.
That's the opposite. I've never read and re-read code more than i do today. The new hires generate 50 more code than they use to, and you _have_ to check it or have compounding production issues (been there, done that). And the errors can now be anywhere, when before you more or less knew what the person writing code is thinking and can understand why some errors are made. LLMs errors could hide _anywhere_, so you have to check it all.
Isn't that a losing proposition? Or do you get 50 times the value out of it too? In my experience the more verbose the code is, the less thought out it is. Lots of changes? Cool, now polish some more and come back when it's below 100 lines change, excluding tests and docs. I don't dare touch it before.
I agree, but i'm shouting at the cloud. Stuff needs to be done, it seems to work at first, so either i just abandon quality and let things rot, or i read everything and underline each time the code smell.
I too use AI, but mostly to generate scripts (the most usefull use of AI is 100-200 line scripts imho), test _cases_ (i write the test itself, the data inside is generated) and HTML/CSS/JS shenanigans (the logic i code, the presentation i'm inferior to any random guy on the internet, so i might as well use an AI). I also use it for stuff that never end in repository, for exploration/proof of concept and outside of scope tests (i like to understand how stuff work, that helps), or to summarize Powerpoint presentations so i can do actual work during 60-person "meetings" and still get the point.
First article about writing code with AI i can get behind 100%. Stuff i already do, stuff i've thought about doing, and at ideas i've never thought doing ("Mark code review levels" especially is a _great_ idea)
Really depends on the company. For me it isn't true, but it used to be when i worked at a bank with terrible management. Nowadays i'm in a tooling team (for Network and security teams), where my "clients" are other devs from the same company. Of course we still have negotiation, but i'd say 60-80% of my time is spend coding, and that's with me being basically a "senior".
And by the way, one thing is missing from the OP graph: i now spend maybe 50% less time writing my own code, and 100% more time fixing my juniors PRs and fixing production issues after my reviews miss issues...
Did you go on grokipedia at release? I still sometimes loose myself reading stuff on Wikipedia, I guarantee you that this can't happen on grok, so much noise between facts it's hard to enjoy.
I don't care about that, that wasn't the point, no one truly care about that. I wanted to know if the feeling of reading meandering writing that can't go to the point when reading AI-generated content was only mine, or if other people who "wiki walk" a lot did the same on Grokipedia (basically spend hours clicking on links and reading random pages). I didn't manage to do it because the writing was too "bad" for me (and i was taken by wiki walk on wookiepedia once, so my tolerance is high). I just wanted to know if it was shared. Did you wiki walk on grokipedia, or do you just use it for "controversial subjects"?
I don't know what wiki walk is. I don't often use grokipedia since I can just prompt an LLM directly, which may in turn extract information from grokipedia.
reply