... where they come with their own idiosyncratic mental/moral flaws

you gotta treat communities like newspapers - acknowledge their bias and diversify

going off my example - chatgpt knows everything about me including desires, goals and issues im struggling with.

combine this with the fact that i have disposable income.

i can't fathom how much advertisers are willing to pay to put themselves in front of my eyes vs a google search for "dining table"

... and it will turn into a "technically true" rat race between the main players on what the definition is exactly while you can ask any person on the street with no skin in the game who will tell you that this is nowhere near the intuitive understanding of what AGI is - as it it's not measured by scores but instead of how real and self-aware your counterpart "feels" to you.

from my experience in the corporate world, i'd trust an excel generated / checked by an LLM more than i would one that has been organically grown over years in a big corporation where nobody ever checks or even can check anything because its one big growing pile of technical debt people just accept as working

... until reality catches up with a software engineer's inability to see outside of the narrow engineering field of view, neglecting most things that the end-users will care about, millions if not billions are wasted and leadership sees that checks and balances for the engineering team might be warranted after all because while velocity was there, you now have an overengineered product nobody wants to pay for.

You’re on the mark - this is the real challenge in software development. Not building software, but building software that actually accomplished the business objective. Unless of course you’re just coding for other reasons besides profit.

I agree... but not at the engineering level.

This is, IMO, a leadership-level problem. You'll always (hopefully) have an engineering manager or staff-level engineer capable of keeping the dev team in check.

I say it's a leadership problem because "partnering with X", "getting Y to market first", and "Z fits our current... strategy" seem to take precedence over what customers really ask for and what engineering is suggesting actually works.

There's little evidence that this is a common problem.

Besides the graveyard of failed start-ups? There's plenty of evidence, just no strong conclusions.

Did you look at the graveyard of failed start-ups and conclude they would of lived if they had enough non-coding overhead?

I look at it and see just as many failed start-ups from engineer-founders as a do from non-engineer founders. The idea that being a programmer makes you better to run a business has nothing to back it up.

I'm not sure where this idea comes from though, it's not something I argued. The post I replied to claims engineers can't see the big picture and deal with end user requirements, and your own testimony above contradicts that.

there is in meta.

Userneed is very much second to company priority metrics.

I wouldn’t say this lends to a bias of over-engineering but more so psc optimizing

if only they could also anticipate what will happen once the tide is falling

i have aphantasia and extensive experience with psychedelics

for me, as long as my consciousness is still in control, i have no closed-eye visuals akin to what others see. the more i lose control/consciousness, the more visuals i get but only over a certain (high) threshold.

dmt is the only substance that consistently gives me visuals but only at close to breakthrough dosages where i effectively lose consiousness. and they are never "things", they are always the known patterns, ie just raw signals and nothing meaningful - but my mind interprets them in whatever it thinks sensible.

otherwise i hallucinate like i dream or think - in an abstract, non visual way, the only thing i "see" are white flashes in nothingness

leaving the use case aside (i don't think it's needed, sensible or succesful) - i have to say i'm admiring how stripe manages to be forward thinking and takes a smart strategic position on every new wave that appears.

never full on moving the tanker like zuckerberg or a16z but always ready to sell shovels to a (potantially) viable submarket that is aligned with their mission and becoming a strategic player in that angle.

very smart.

sorry, but while it definitely looks better than it did in the 90s, it's neither a professional level design nor better than mac os. and you don't need to be a designer to see it.

those misleading hype statements are the reason why stuff like "this is the year of the linux desktop!" is a meme because anybody outside of your nerd/tech bubble will just look at you like you're insane.

I would argue most people have a poor eye for design and would just use whats popular despite if it looks amazing or just cromulent enough for the job

maybe i'm too cynical but to me this looks more like an orchestrated "win" story for the eu ecosystem with some backroom dealing/incentives and some ex-post rationalisation sprinkled on rather than a strategic invest by asml.