

Being subject to social pressure doesn’t make you weak or less than. It is a normal part of being a social animal.


Being subject to social pressure doesn’t make you weak or less than. It is a normal part of being a social animal.


Why? I consistently see these anti AI purity tests come up.
We need people who are skeptical to engage on AI.
People hate technology and change. Before AI it was smartphones. Before smartphones it was photoshop/digital art and CGI. Before CGI it was the Internet. Before Internet it was TV. Before TV it was cars. Before cars it was industry. Before industry it was books.
Someone probably was anti cave paintings because it ruined the skill of passing down the stories by word of mouth.
Something is always coming along that is both horrible for society as it is and something we come to accept as common place. You can want to return to our roots but even that I guarantee you would still pick some level of technology you don’t want to do without.


My worry is that the people we need engaged on AI because they have a healthy mindset to question and wrangle it, are instead being forced to ignore AI or pledge to be anti AI by their social circles and customers.
So instead we have absolute Kool aid drinkers driving the AI adoption.
We went through this with the internet but I think a lot of folks now are too young to remember it and unsurprisingly the people who were anti internet didn’t store their concerns and complaints in the currently used modern repository of all knowledge.


Why is your hobby more important than their hobby?


Yea but if someone uses those bindings then you can’t just not support it.
By the time this code gets into a large scale production system it will be 2029. That is when the bugs will come in if someone leveraged the Rust bindings.
You can ask the big company users at that time to contribute their fixes upstream, but if they get resistance because they have relatively junior Rust devs trying to push up changes that only a handful of maintainers understand, the company will just stop upstreaming their changes.
The primary concern that a major open source project like this will have is that the major contributors will decide that interacting with it is more trouble than it is worth. That is how open source projects move to being passion projects and then die when the passion dies.


Yea and if the Rust developers don’t show up to the show? Rust is a baby and it has done so little on its own. This isn’t a neat little side project, this is code that a major vendor will want to take up and will demand be maintained. There are implications on a global scale.


It’s mostly in that linked thread. The high level of it is a guy wanted to push Rust code. The maintainer said no it would mean the API for this would be tied to Rust and that is unacceptable. It cause another big contributer to throw a fit and Linus said he can’t be everyone’s mom. They kept fighting for like 2 months apparently? Now Linus stepped in, looked at the code and said the Rust code clearly doesn’t impact the API in the way the maintainer was saying it just breaks itself if the maintainers allow changes to the API.
I kinda dislike the idea that it’s cool for people to contribute code that is so easy to break. I have a feeling after it happens a few times they are going to claim that it is being done intentionally and that the slap fights will carry on.


Every PC will be using AI as we move forward and thinking they won’t seems as head in the sand to me as thinking the Internet would be a fad. Remember how awful the Internet was in the 80s and 90s? AI is in a similar spot today.
Why would I read a manual when I can ask an AI to summarize it and give me pages so I can confirm? If I’m trying to do a task I know a million people have solved like Python code to translate XLSX and CSV to JSON and back, why wouldn’t I use AI for that?
Trusting AI outright and not reviewing the answers is silly, but doing research with AI is soooo much faster. Also the majority of articles and manuals you find online written in the past year used AI and you can have CoPilot spit it out to you WITH the original sources that the website/blog hides.
The idea that AI isn’t trustworthy is silly, because no one is trustworthy. You should always have been double checking things for yourself, but sitting and struggling through something for 2 days is foolish when AI could do 80% of the work for you in seconds.
The average tax income from billionaires in california looks to be around 10million a year. So combined the about 200 billionaires in california are paying 2 billion a year. Rough numbers would be that is 150 of them left then the one time tax would start being a negative income in 10 years. That assumes money stays flat.
Honestly there is no way that this ends up being a serious net negative and these folks are still operating in California enough that they may fail to avoid residency review.