Henry Petroski in "To Engineer is Human" has a chapter about the advent of the calculator during the slide rule era, and that calculators (and later computers) eroded a structural engineer's "feel for the numbers", caused engineers to pursue work on the fringe of their abilities, and perhaps more seriously, limited their ability to verify the correctness of the computer's work (this was the era where, for the first time, a machine could perform orders of magnitude calculations more quickly than humans could). He outlines the collapse of the Hartford Civic Center [1] as a case study in when blindly trusting computer output goes wrong (and by sheer luck, no one was killed).
It feels like the example was cherry-picked, but the combination of "less accurate" and "more confident" made me immediately think of this disaster. I truly worry that it's going to take civilian deaths / liability before the proper use / place of these new technologies is adopted, but we could probably start with 1) not in safety critical systems, and 2) don't replace your specialists / experts with algorithms.
How about professions that require licensing to practice (civil engineering, accounting, insurance, actuarial science, law, medicine, pharmacy, nursing), or work in the government sector (defense, military, municipal/state/federal agencies)?
Agreed, building something is just the first step.
One of the marketing struggles I've had is just getting people to care. I did have a bit of an "If you build it, they will come" attitude because I had confidence in the quality of the work...but even that seems to be irrelevant if you can't get people interested.
As an introvert by nature (extrovert by necessity), I wonder what I'm missing that others seems to grasp innately, because the consequences are fatal for an entrepreneur if you can't convince others to at least try the thing you're offering.
Just be careful if you believe the itch is the result of something you might be allergic to (e.g., food, or bug bites).
I had several bites from fire ants and ran them under hot water from the bath, which seemed to trigger (or accelerate) a full-body reaction (anaphylaxis?) and a harrowing trip to the emergency room!
May I ask where / how you came about your copy? I've seen it mentioned several times but have found it difficult to locate.
(For example, the used copy on Amazon is selling for $2000!)
Personally, I enjoy detail-oriented activies, so software suits me just fine. But if I was going to switch to something else, I'd ask myself "What other detail-oriented industries could I thrive in?"
* Restaurant / hotel management (specifically, the atmosphere and ambience of a space)
Why not just "So, how long have you been programming for?"
I'd interpret this question as "Does this person think I'm experienced enough for the work?" over explicitly wanting to know whether I began at a young age.
"What do you call the number of times that one number can be divided by another?" A) Dividend, B) Divisor, C) Quotient.
And a minor UX nitpick: please wrap the input element inside of a <label> tag, it makes it much easier to interact with form elements (in that I can click on the text to mark the element):
One colloquial term for the guillotine was (is?) "le rasoir national" = "the national razor."
Other colorful terms include "the regretful climb", "the silence mill", "Capet's necktie", "the patriotic shortener", "half-moon", "timbers of justice", and "Charlot's rocking-chair".
OK, I didn't mean to sound harsh, that statement just seemed out of place.
Taking another look at this, here's what I see:
> As AI capability continues to advance, it'll consistently and increasingly outperform traditional human analysis in both speed and accuracy.
> Our Orchid hybrid model combines neural networks, quantitative models, and language models to leverage both numerical and textual information, enabling smarter, faster algorithmic decision-making with significantly less human supervision.
> Here's a couple use cases: ...
> Simulating the past twelve months, our implementation of Orchid outperformed the S&P 500 by over 10%.
These four statements tell me the problem/opportunity, your solution to that opportunity, how that solution might be relevant / useful to me, and proof that your solution works.
This is your value proposition, and what I need to know about Orchid as a potential customer / user. I'd consolidate these four statements and put them at the top of the page. The jokes can come later (but I'd still tone down the sarcasm).
If your country allows it, why not consider both? Or a major in CS with a minor in Business Administration/Finance?
> ...a CS degree...will probably lose value.
I wouldn't bet on that. Computers aren't going anywhere, and just in the past 15 years, we've seen entire industries created around smartphones, cloud computing, streaming, VR, IoT, SaaS, and AI. Pick which wave you want to surf! A technical and/or a business background would be useful here.
> I'm not confident that 4 years from now the field will be what it is now.
That I would bet on.
And by the way, just because you major (or don't major) in something doesn't mean you've locked yourself into (or out of) that activity. When I switched from music performance to computer science, I had the feeling that I had turned my back on my music, that I couldn't now excel in it...which was nonsense! It wasn't until I realized, that just because I don't major in something doesn't mean I still can't do that thing well, was I able to embrace the decision to choose CS.
It feels like the example was cherry-picked, but the combination of "less accurate" and "more confident" made me immediately think of this disaster. I truly worry that it's going to take civilian deaths / liability before the proper use / place of these new technologies is adopted, but we could probably start with 1) not in safety critical systems, and 2) don't replace your specialists / experts with algorithms.
[1] https://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/thesis/failures/MKP/failures/fai...