It's not outside Jason Rohrer's style for this to be... guided output, but it's also not outside his style for this to be the creepiest fully autonomous bot I've ever seen.
I really love Rob Mensching's framing in Open Source Maintenance Fee[1]. "The _software_ is free. The _project_ (issue tracker, forums, release management, package repository, etc.) is not."
It doesn't solve the supplier problem, but it is a very clever way to square the "free software, but I'd like to cover my expenses" circle.
In all three cases, they own hardware (Apple in a slightly different sense) that they'd love for you to pay to run your favorite models on, open or closed.
Slightly less obtusely, it usually was a procedurally generated dungeon-crawler with potions and scrolls and varied weapons to use against varied mobs. When you died, you were dead. Your character began each time with no knowledge and had to learn what a "cloudy red potion" happens to be this time around by drinking it or using an identify scroll.
I'm sure MySpace thought the same thing about their never-before-seen accomplishments. I suspect very few people knew what "something else" was in that case, either.
ChatGPT's threat to Google isn't that Google can't match it--it's that it changes the approach to search results from displaying lists of results where it's "natural" to insert sponsored listings to a more conversational approach where ad opportunities will be rarer (or at least entirely different).
If users prefer the newer, interactive approach to exploring search results, Google's long-standing business model will require a significant update.
By definition, each program only produces the digits of one number. It's okay for more than one program to produce the same number. Am I misunderstanding your point?
I _do_ work at Microsoft, and judging by the recent crop of promotions (early September) there was still plenty of opportunity for white males (and everyone else).
Stephen Wolfram has really grown on me over the last 10 years or so. He came across as obnoxiously arrogant for the longest time (so much that I still (defensibly) refer to "A New Kind of Science" as "Stephen Wolfram is a MF'n Genius Even If He Does Say So Himself").
These days, he live streams Mathematica design reviews on YouTube and Twitch. The conversations are fairly balanced and he clearly has a decent eye for designing the best god damn computational notebook system on the planet.
Admittedly, campaigning to name what could possibly maybe someday be the next big upgrade to physics after himself ("the Wolfram Physics Project") while he's still around and it's still in development is MIGHTY BOLD. But there's some really really interesting outcomes from the work that they've done so far.
If nothing else, it's a slam dunk proof of how physicists already think of "the speed of light" as actually "the speed limit for causal interaction". You essentially get all of the implications of both special and general relativity out of modeling causal interactions without even attaching it to any sort of specific physics.
I love that he wrote this essay (typical Wolfram long form essay that takes multiple sittings for me to digest) using puzzles and games as the subject of aforementioned causal modeling. Super fun, and also insightful!
VS Code, while not a fully-fledged IDE, is really good at suggesting code completions across platforms. As others have mentioned, Rider is also a wonderful fully cross-platform IDE (better than Visual Studio at some things).