> In some sense, the visionaries in this space are not thinking big enough. I want visions of mobility with a totally different size, look, speed, etc. autonomous Golf carts? tuktuks? A moving autonomous bicycle carrier? etc
If anything, it's the opposite: most people in this space (Elon, George Hotz, Demis, etc.) have been saying for a very long time that autonomous driving is just the first step, and that their objective is to build world models.
I'm not talking specifically about SpaceX, although historically the cost of their rockets have been much lower than NASA. I'm being much more general. The public sector doesn't have the same incentives that private companies have, whether it's rockets or any other technology. It's sad, but it's the truth.
This is the first time I read that someone uses an acronym for ragebait purposes. The acronym "RL" is very well known. Dwarkesh's podcast is mostly AI related, so it's not a surprise that he will freely use acronyms. I think your take is very cynical.
I disagree with you. I think the impact of AI on society in the long term is going to be massive, and such investments are necessary. If we look at the past century, technology has had (in my opinion) and incredibly positive impact on society. You have to invest in the future.
As someone who is interested in getting more serious with Rust, could you explain the essence of how you should always approach organizing code in Rust as to minimize refactors as the code grows?
Not OP, but I've been using melatonin every night, no exception, and it's been very helpful. I use a much lower dose (between 0.3mg and 0.5mg), and it's worked completely fine, so I would suggest that you start very low and only increase if you really need it.
Once we have AI-based language servers, which will, at some point in the future, be able to track entire repositories, I think maintaining projects will actually be far easier than right now.