Realistic calculations should include both sides. New way vs old. In this case AI assisted vs manual. Here intentionally only one side considered. Because comparison does not produce desirable result. Which makes in attention attracting BS.
I didn't say replace, but complexity is the biggest barrier for newcomers. A lot of typing comparing to other languages. I use professionally since 90th, the more popular it gets the better. And complexity is the major problem, not memory management like some argue.
How about thin C++ wrapper? The language with the same features, but more human friendly. It should be easily directly translated to C++. Preferably both ways.
The thing is the luck as usually on the side of bigger battalions. Smaller teams don't have the rich and width of bigger companies. All in all we need the full spectrum from single person startup to mega corporations.
That's what Amazon is doing. They simply increase the output norm and promise mass layoffs again. MS promises too, I'm not sure about details, but likely they don't cut the projects. Which means use of some sort of copilot is expected now.
The question is what happens to developers. Will they quit the industry or move to smaller companies?
What's the point? Looks like today Rust is like 3D printing was. As if it makes something better. Printing was hyped and advertised by printers sellers and manufacturers. Finally they run out of money.
As for project, it's cool if compatible with old soft. Otherwise suitable mostly for education and masochism. Long way to become practical anyway even if it gets traction.
> but I think that Durov was pressed for enabling backdoors for CIA when he was arrested in France.
Durov was pressed from every side from the beginning, no doubts about this. But CIA or FSB cannot demand it legally even with secret court orders. There were news that since arrest in France he started providing some info on criminals. Not sure how far did he go. But it's good to know that Whatsup is fully cooperating with governments even when they don't have to. Putting people at risk.
As for smartphones, there are so many security holes that it's impossible to secure. Many harmless applications are calling home, pictures are geo-targeted, cell towers can request info from connected phones, every update can turn OS or app into trojan. If infected it's a perfect audio and video collection device. Put together with soldiers' IDs it shows where the unit is. Add to that CIA and alike working with weakening everyone's security and getting priority access to sensitive information.
If ayatollah gets nuke regime becomes forever like in North Korea. And Israel may suffer first because nuke strike is the only chance for Iran right now. Hope they don't have it and ayatollah goes to Moscow.
Russia and China totally expected, they don't help much. Except for Turkey NATO on Israel's side, not surprising. Iraq open sky used for airstrikes. Muslim 'allies' probably help refueling Israelis planes. The rest of the world doesn't care much.
Me thinking, is it time for a new 'programming' language for LLM to use instead of tools API calls? Something high level with loose grammar, in between natural language and strict programming. Then the backend, may be another smaller model, translates it in API calls. With this approach backend can be improved and updated much faster and cheaper then LLM model.
I was trying to say that dropping old technologies isn't always bad.
> It’s like if I was hiring a mathematician.
Do you expect candidate to memorize all theorems up to date. Usually people forgetting things they don't actively use. But they are able to refresh their knowledge if needed. I've learned quite a lot, but no, I don't remember even key theorems from partial differential equations (used them in my diploma). I can refresh and relearn quickly, I'm sure.
Using LLM without understanding disqualifies the candidate, even monkey can do it. But if he deeply understands the subject and uses LLM for like handbook for minor details.. that's different.
Here is the big question: should it be equal or better then every single person? If we assume that every healthy person is 'generally intelligent' then probably this is a benchmark. Because not every person can do the tasks that other persons do routinely. Probably we shouldn't demand it from AGI either. At least not from a single model. But it makes sense to request that specialized model can be created (or trained, fine tuned) for every task humans can do.
> I'm firmly convinced that being able to troubleshoot code, even code generated by LLMs, and to write guidelines and tests to make sure it's functioning, is a skill of a shrinking pool
If it is a surveillance then street photography is too. Camera pointing at spectators isn't good either...