Hey it's almost as if you give decision making power to something that doesn't have a concept of mortality or morality it won't take those things into account. Who could have guessed.

I love how the movie made in the 80s had a computer that was smart enough to realize nuclear weapons are bad but real life in 2025/26 has real computers that aren't smart enough to figure it out. I think as a species we have all been far to optimistic.

Maybe Ghandi was right.

• https://removepaywalls.com/3/https://www.newscientist.com/article/2516885-ais-cant-stop-recommending-nuclear-strikes-in-war-game-simulations/
• https://ghostarchive.org/archive/SC1ys

Claims that it can, but no evidence or anecdotal examples of how it worked in practice.

Looks like a fork bomb with extra steps.

Use keeps rising because it's enforced in many places. Gains from it stay small or negative, I'd guess

Let's hope it doesn't.
The HDD I was planning on, went up 25% in 2 months and now I am planning on deletion and compression instead.

I guess I'll never have enough to do a backup.

Judging by what I know about Torvalds, he's a pragmatist. Bases his decisions on technical requirements. Not sure if it's a surprise someone like him tries vibe coding? It'd align with my more fact-driven perspective on the world. I'd also try things and make up my mind. See myself if a tool / programming language / project can be of use for my particular wants and needs... I mean being sceptical about something doesn't necessarily exclude nor include anything.

Reminder that "is" does not mean "will".

You’ve gone too far with your labels on me and what I post. I’m not a damn bot! The top mods know me. It seems difficult for people to imagine that I’m just really engaged.

@mods

FYI. This user is a new account spamming poor quality infographics for the last few hours.

It's using data over a year old.

Some of the examples seem like nothingburgers, the Lucy Letby example actually looks like the AI failing "safe" by refusing to make a conclusion.

(It's also questionable of the BBC to insist that de jure and de facto innocence is the same thing, it probably is in the Letby case, but you wouldn't want it to necessarily make that assumption in, for instance, the OJ Simpson case)

Do we really need datacenters to host (load balanced) web servers and services?

This could challenge the business model of Big Tech!

In December 2024, the BBC carried out research into the accuracy of four prominent AI assistants that can search the internet – OpenAI’s ChatGPT; Microsoft’s Copilot; Google’s Gemini; and Perplexity. We did this by reviewing responses from the AI assistants to 100 questions about the news, asking AI assistants to use BBC News sources where possible.

The answers produced by the AI assistants contained significant inaccuracies and distorted content from the BBC. In particular: …

51 % significant issues, 19 % factual errors, 13 % altered or invalid quote citations

The article isn't very concrete on what the substance of this Anyway System is.

The FAQ answered my question though, and it seems mostly about dynamic management of PCs as execution nodes.

I assume that means I could run the model on one of those PCs as well, despite the article claiming you can use as few as four PCs? Or does this system somehow distribute a single model prompt process into multiple execution pipelines?

Regular desktop PC with a €2500 euro graphics card.

A 120b parameter model is small compared to the models running in datacenters. However, this does seem like the current "Moore's Law" for AI. Finding more and more efficient ways to run larger parameter models.

Without understanding how it’s built, how do I know if there’s duplication, dead code, or poor patterns? I used to obsess over this. Now I’m less worried that a human needs to read the code, because I’m genuinely not sure that they do.

What you do need: simple entry points, explicit code with fewer abstractions, minimal coupling, and linear control flow.

Seems to be the common simple standard software works well fallacy.

By “can replace developers”, what do they mean? They don't clarify, only talk about their three success projects.

We've seen studies of the issues and risks, and discrepancy between user perception and more factual gains. And this post certainly seems like they're not experienced in or thinking of development and maintenance that goes beyond simple standard integration software. Which doesn't make it too surprising they're not concerned about security for those simpler projects either.

"A computer can never be held accountable, therefore a computer must never make a management decision."

• IBM, 1979

I argue that coding decisions that matter are management decisions.

Some shit slop machine is spewing slop. News at 11.

Wait, Napster has been piracy all along?