Who has the time to watch films 10-12 hours a day?

I think the comment put forward that as an incorrect assumption that was made prior to the cable build-out.

Which is now an actual way that people use streaming services.

The quote in the original comment assesses the survey responses as "impossible". A good-faith reading of the comment is that the professor was not talking about a handful of respondents.

Nobody is doubting that there are some people who watch films 10–12 hours a day, every day of the week.

https://www.nplusonemag.com/issue-49/essays/casual-viewing/ and its HN comments (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42529756) argue that it's more than just a handful of respondents.

This is an apples to some non-food item comparison.

AWS has so many analogs. It’s not as novel. Renting vs buying a home/car/anything is essentially what AWS brought.

I mean, if you don’t like refactoring, which is my absolute favorite, it’s hard to believe you understand software engineering and software architecture.

Tedium absolutely exists in coding. And is usually a sign of bad interfaces and/or architecture.

For most of us it wasn’t really about getting the user to do X. It’s getting the user to do X at 1/10th of the price, 10x the speed, and the user is left absolutely amazed.

Magic is for the user to experience. Not for the user of the programming language.

> it’s hard to believe you understand software engineering and software architecture.

I made over $500k TC writing active-active high availability services that moved billions of dollars a day. I've been around the block.

> Magic is for the user to experience. Not for the user of the programming language.

Why are you treating our primitive technology as holy? It's all temporary fucking garbage that is a limitation of our current civilizational abilities.

Do you think the Linux kernel will live forever? I think we'll be done with it before 2050. Seriously.

Everything you think is permanent is just temporary.

I would rather be building star ships and holodecks and engineering 10,000 year human lifespans, brain uploads, and stuff like that than worrying about the craftsmanship of some dumb web service.

I think you should dream more and worry about the current station of SWEs less. We're merely a stepping stone.

You and I are stepping stones. We're dust.

None of what we do today will be relevant in some short decades. And that is a blip on the geologic timescales.

I was born too early for this bullshit. I don't like living with you neanderthals, especially when you don't want to step out of the cave.

Thankfully I don't have to worry about this tech winning. It already is. You can keep up or hold your nose until you're out of a job. There are plenty of other things you could do, I just wouldn't bet on being a truck driver.

Didn’t know I’d ever get to use the phrase “banal platitudes,” which is how I’d describe much of this post.

Obviously and literally everything is temporary and will be replaced by something better. And those who are born into it will call it “temporary garbage.”

Thanks for the bonus ad hominems. Made it all more convincing.

> Writing code to solve problems is fun. Prompting an AI to solve problems makes me want to eat a gun.

If this is how well you write prose, I would absolutely hate it if you stopped writing code.

Joke aside, I read your comment and wanted to yell “PREACH!” Pretty sure that’s the first time I felt like I had a use for that word.

Is it so unthinkable that people don’t want to participate in that cool experiment?

I think the correct term is *translopped*

So work for mercenaries, and tell people “it’s just a job?”

Maybe there are shades of gray between black and white.

You’re right that it doesn’t prove anything.

However, the amount of money and energy spent on trying to convince people that “AI will take jobs”, by parties who would benefit from it, implies that these parties maybe don’t fully believe it, or believe that it needs to be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

If I am certain that I am winning, I sure don’t need to yell it from mountain tops. Unless my winning depends on everyone believing it.

I understood the intention of the statement and actually agree with it mostly. My point was just about the line of reasoning. But then again I also mostly agree that "AI" will make many jobs superfluous. People like Schmidt don't just try to announce that into reality; their point is about speeding up the process as they are invested in it and benefit from it happening earlier than if things would just progress naturally.

No time for common sense solutions! Tokens gotta go somewhere!

I mean, some trade-offs are “something for nothing” which by definition makes them “the wrong way.”

Real life does exist.