More practically, society should be reimagined around AI. You're comment presumes an outcome that will be politically determined: you can still fight for the world you want.
That was a reccomendation from a philosophy professor I had in college. By the end of the semester, I didn't even have to review my notes.
I went back to school at 25, and that moment made me realize why school felt strangely more difficult, and then I remembered that we wrote down everything back then.
From the article, it looks like ads are separate from answers in a clearly delineated way. It's not quite as nefarious as what you're suggesting. Frankly, I'm surprised.
This is only round one however, and I could see a future where they offer more "intimate" experiences. At least that's not today.
We will suffer from not knowing how to add. You could still argue "so what?"
Systems aren't a single addition. They are compounded operations with sprawling complexity. What happens when you can't reason through the system? What happens when you start asking for the wrong things? What happens when saying "fix it" on loop stops working?
The FDE is really the consolidation of two existing roles: solutions architect and engineer.
In the old days, sales would close a client with the help of someone in technical sales and a solutions architect that would come up with a high level spec for a solution. That spec would be fleshed out post sales and then given to an engineer to develop.
Today the FDE often does both.
The difference between Palantir and pure consulting is that Palantir has a core software platform that they customize per client. The business model is more akin to IBM or SAP products.
I'm not sure I follow what one step means exactly. Aren't all models some f(x) = y? Is the suggestion instead that we should be doing f(x) = g(h(x)) = y?
Of course they did: they could have just chosen to not publish apps which would have crippled iOS. The only reason it feels existential is because developers made a Faustian bargain from the beginnning.
> these are the firms that spend on multiple models and use the most advanced and productivity-enhancing products available (coding agents and APIs as opposed to simple chat subscriptions)
> who funded you is a better predictor of AI adoption than the sector you’re in
My bet is that these companies are either:
1. In the business of trying to automate other jobs. The number of startups in this space is stupefying, so I'm sure more established companies with VC cash want a slice.
2. Leveraging AI to accelerate growth as much as possible because that's their mandate.
What's scary is that hiring across the rest of adopters (most employment) has remained stagnant. So what happens during the next recession?