ThenElection
No bio...
User ID: 622
ThenElection
1d ago
The biggest change has been in coding and software engineering capabilities. Around December, models and harnesses reached an inflection point: before, they could do small tasks, but it was very easy to find yourself spending as much time guiding or coaching them as you would have spent coding it yourself. That is no longer the case.
Personally, in the past month I've probably committed 3x the code as I did in the past, while actually writing maybe 10% as much as I did before. I'm somewhat ahead of the curve, even within my very AI-forward company and team, but for years I've felt "AI will put me out of a job in 5 years"; this is the first time that expected career longevity has actually decreased. I've got an agent working on a ticket right now.
We also have seen advances in math, video, cost per token, etc., but the software inflection point is driving the current vibe shift.
ThenElection
2d ago
I can imagine a kind of internal logic that overlaps heavily with "men bad, women good" ideas. Anyone can change their identity and pronouns at will, but by choosing to do something heinous, they have switched their identity to male.
As an intuition pump, would people be more likely to "misgender" a MtF or a FtM mass shooter?
ThenElection
4d ago
It is more or less the same, but (with proper massaging) might be framed in a more popular way than direct taxation of the childless. E.g. make future cost of living adjustments apply only to parents.
ThenElection
4d ago
Just have most of someone's FICA be earmarked to their parents. It shifts the framing from punitive to a benefit. More or less eliminate Social Security for people who don't have kids (maybe give them a couple hundred of dollars a month or so); if you don't have kids, you have more opportunity to earn income anyway, so you don't have an excuse not to have saved for retirement.
Somewhere on the Motte we were having a discussion about male vs female life expectancies (IIRC motivated by the UN declaring men dying 5 years earlier than women "equality"), and the decrease in the gap comes in much earlier than billionaires. I think it was, once you get into the top decile, the gap drops to below two years.
It's much more accurate to say, if you're poor, don't be a man, than it is to say if you're rich, don't be a woman, unless your interest in life expectancy is just in having a big gap. Every step up the income ladder for both sexes increases life expectancy; it just does so much more for men.
It's not some biological law that all men die younger than women do.
It is, somewhat. Across the animal kingdom, the heterozygotic sex (XY, ZW) nearly always has a shorter average lifespan than the homozygotic sex (XX, ZZ).
You are comparing yourself to AI at its present capabilities (or the capabilities it has that have already diffused to your interest and skills). Give it some time.
I do manage to be cautiously optimistic, though, at least for my individual future. I have no illusions that I'll be able to provide any economic value in 5 years, and I'm fine with that. And I'm excited for many of the same reasons you are: knowledge is so much easier to find and learn than three years ago, and I'll have decades to learn things about the world that no human knows today. The only question is how to protect myself from futures where we evolve into a two class society of the high and the low.
Is the main mode here busybody teacher makes a report because she doesn't like some way a child is being raised, or hyper-cautious institutional representative makes a report because they don't want to be caught up in a lawsuit or turn up on the local news?
More options
Context Copy link