Even the best LLMs today are just junior devs with a lot of knowledge. They make a lot of the same mistakes junior devs would do. Even the responses, when you point out those mistakes, are the same.
If anything, it's a tool for junior devs to get better and spend more time on the architecture.
Using AI code without fully understanding it (ie operated by a non-programmer) is just recipe for disaster.
I think because settling for less is just not an option, progress at large would be hindered with a pressure for using less energy, even though it’s the right thing, arguably. Hence demand for more energy itself propels progress and innovation.
If we're meant to believe climate predictions coming out of the UN and similar, potential innovation spurred by an increase in energy production would slam face first into the wall of climate catastrophe even faster.
I'm not even saying I put much faith behind those predictions, but in the context of contradicting climate concerns with tech "innovation" requiring such massive amounts of energy it seems pertinent. We can't have it both ways, either most agree that the climate concerns are baseless or we accept that we collectively would be choosing to destroy the planet faster in the name of progress and innovation.
"Progress" itself is such an interesting term. There's no directionality to it, the only meaning is that we aren't standing still. There's nothing baked into progress that would stop us from progressing right off a cliff, I suppose unless we're already off the cliff and progress could change that.
Its a reasonable hope that we could discover a new energy source that can produce orders of magnitude more energy with even less impact than today's sources, but that is just a hope. In the meantime we would be committing ourselves to a new, much higher baseline of energy needs whether we make that discovery or not.
It does, but the general public does not seem to believe anyone can operate it safely enough to allow it in their communities. That position may or may not be supported by facts, but that only matters in countries where politicians don't answer to the electorate.
Sure, nuclear may fit the bill. That avoids needing a new advancement if we're happy enough with the environmental impact of nuclear generation, but it doesn't avoid all the external costs beyond just the nuclear reaction.
Reactors themselves take a large amount of resources, some rare, to build. Infrastructure is another huge resource suck, all that copper has to come from somewhere. Nuclear has the nice benefit of being on-demand, so it does at least dodge resources needed for energy storage.
The guy behind the article is bashing on Musk on constant basis. What a biased, one sided, bullshit article. You can also check his also rantings. I guess.. he wanted to work for Musk, but was never able to? Why the hate?
He even deleted my comments when trying to argue on some of his statements. Lol.
Yeah, it seemed pretty balanced and well thought out:
"Ploy for credibility, retreating even deeper into fantasy, pretense of reality, pure fantasy, contained within a world of fantasy, retreating into misinformation-fuelled fantasy world, runaway ego, less palatable, self-soothing fantasy bubble, fake statistics, blown deadlines, litany of bullshit, chronic inability, unprecedented publish delusion or deception, having drawn a poor hand, financial-cognitive nightmare, it’s hard to imagine anyone seriously believing that a night of delusional Disney Adult cringe, too childish to call a fraud, Musk’s increasingly-degenerate gambling run is slouching toward one last big coinflip"
Facts sprinkled with personal interpretation, a normal, albeit not an extraordinary, blog post?
I admire some of the things Elon Musk has made happen, but the guy has obvious ego issues and acts often like a villain from a child superhero movie. If a blog post is "biased, one sided, bullshit" for calling this behavior and all the accompanying unkept promises, what they are, together with some creative words and interpretation, why do we have blog posts in the first place?
It's not that bad. He's one of the rare people criticizing Musk while not exhibiting the delusion that Musk's predictions are "promises." So he avoids some of the more clueless mistakes although he still does manage to miss that the point of the event was just the unveiling of a product (the robo taxi), not its final delivery.
China's progress and this accomplishment are very impressive, the more the merrier. But NASA does have two nuclear powered humvees driving on Mars at the moment.
In the space industry, the US is so much ahead of everyone else. SpaceX is the long pole in the tent, but there are many other startups doing cool stuff.
Despite advancements, China still relies on key technologies from other countries, such as semiconductor manufacturing, where the U.S., Taiwan, and South Korea are leaders.
The U.S. and other countries maintain a strong lead in original innovation, with Silicon Valley and other tech hubs producing groundbreaking technologies and startups.
While China has made significant progress, the U.S. (through NASA and private companies like SpaceX) has more extensive and diverse achievements in space, including reusable rockets and plans for Mars colonization.
Countries like Japan and Germany are leaders in robotics and automation technologies, with advanced systems and innovations that often surpass those of China.
China faces criticism for intellectual property theft and lack of respect for IP laws, which undermines perceptions of its technological advancements.
Although China produces a high volume of research, the quality and global impact of research from the U.S. and Europe are often considered higher.
Yes, but the claim is not "US and Europe is so much ahead of everyone else in tech, space and automation that it's not funny anymore" but that China is. So, while the answer to your question is "of course" it's not relevant to the claim.
> Despite advancements, China still relies on key technologies from other countries, such as semiconductor manufacturing, where the U.S., Taiwan, and South Korea are leaders.
Doesn't the US (and most of the world) rely on Taiwan for semiconductors as well?
> The U.S. and other countries maintain a strong lead in original innovation, with Silicon Valley and other tech hubs producing groundbreaking technologies and startups.
There's nothing like WeChat in the west yet. I'm not sure this strong lead is still there.
> Although China produces a high volume of research, the quality and global impact of research from the U.S. and Europe are often considered higher.
By whom?
It's important to consider that China and the US/Europe didn't start on equal footing.
Just 75 years ago China was ages behind the US. The speed at which they're progressing is mindblowing, especially considering their population.
Compare China with India, if your intent is to do a fairer comparison.
> There's nothing like WeChat in the west yet. I'm not sure this strong lead is still there.
China has a lot of really impressive technology and innovation happening. An app store inside a messaging app is not what I would point to as groundbreaking from a technology standpoint.
It's not an app store inside a messaging app, it's a mega app. You can do literally everything with it, from home banking to payments to filing for divorce and booking a doctor.
>The U.S. and other countries maintain a strong lead in original innovation, with Silicon Valley and other tech hubs producing groundbreaking technologies and startups.
What are these groundbreaking technologies? Social apps? Marketing automation tools? Ride sharing apps?
Please read the community guidelines, arnavpraneet. Specifically:
> Assume good faith.
And
> Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.
Elon Musk is ahead of everyone else in space. While nice, this and everything else anyone has done this and past decade in space is much less significant than the far more economical rockets Musk has built, basically with his bare hands.
Right, however it is customary to ascribe accomplishments to the person making the work possible rather than those who execute it. The same engineers won’t do as much anywhere else.
