That's likely to get better. Last year, consistently getting fingers and arms right was tough. This year, there are AI-generated violin playing videos.
> I would never assume the AI answer to a consequential problem to be authoritative, unless it shows me the source and I can click on the link to verify the source and the data presented (search engine use case).
That remains the elephant in the room - the tendency to make up fake answers. Until that's fixed, LLMs are only useful for problems where the cost of such errors is an externality, dumped on the consumer.
> That remains the elephant in the room - the tendency to make up fake answers. Until that's fixed, LLMs are only useful for problems where the cost of such errors is an externality, dumped on the consumer.
That’s one of fears. The general public and politicians alike will trust AI without scrutiny. We’ve already seen examples of judges relying on flawed software, with devastating outcomes for innocent people. With the rapid push and widespread enthusiasm for AI, a darker future looms if these problems aren’t addressed.
Today's kids have smartphones, PCs/Macs, Video Game Consoles, and movie streaming devices and are unsupervised on the Internet. For role models, they have rap stars who sing about sex and drugs. They have no respect for teachers or other adults and don't know how good they have it compared to me and the rest of Generation X. No wonder they are getting ruder.
https://www.chron.com/business/article/Why-didn-t-Steve-Jobs...
Steve Jobs wouldn't let his kids use iPads. He must have known something of the side-effects in kids and iPads. Just try to take the iPad or iPhone away from a kid and see how they react.
I don’t know if there are any stats to back this up but anecdotally I know plenty of kids with all kinds of freedoms and gadgets who are extremely respectful, well-mannered, and responsible. They respectfully disagree with their parents on some issues and some of old fashioned parents may consider disagreement as disrespectful. And they might not accept mistreatment from authority figures, but hardly any real misbehavior issues.
Maybe it’s my circle but average gen z kid seems like way more mature than us when we were their age.
Rude kids that I have encountered are mostly from parents who are already rude, entitled, or have macho mentality. Kind of people I rarely hangout with. Many of these kids have more restrictions too, no video games, must play sports, extra tutoring, cannot dress certain ways, etc.
But as you said — it’s been there in C# for a while and imho it’s a good abstraction over getters and setters. Even 2005-era IDEs could manage it fine, making it easy to access the property’s get/set code, so that it wasn’t really magical.
Maybe it’s a culture thing — most C# devs use IDEs. Not sure what PHP devs use, but I suspect tools like PhpStorm will make this easy to work with somehow. Devs using no-LSP editors will likely have a different view.
This is probably one of the big factors. I am also not a huge fan of “magic” even though I use IDE (vscode). I started off as a PHP dev, directly editing files on production server using vi. Any “magic” simply slowed me down.
Years later, now I can simply cmd+click to anywhere in code but it feels a bit off to me. Perhaps, I still miss my old days of dev.
Now, if I waste $60 and four hours on an abysmal game, it's $60 that I could have used to take my kids to the movies, get takeout for my wife and I, or any number of other things. Same with the time. Five hours is time I could have spent cleaning the house, working on my side projects, etc.
I love gaming, and I destress by playing games, but it's not worth the now much higher opportunity cost to play the newer (usually worse) stuff.
That said, not all new games are terrible. Dredge is a game made last year that was absolutely phenomenal in my mind, and well worth the cost and time. Spent way too many late nights fishing in that game.
That’s why I prefer to buy older games that have received enough reviews from regular people.
Deleted Comment
Not everything we don't like should be illegal.
This sounds like the kind of thing that is incredibly unenforceable anyway. How do you differentiate between "we're not actually hiring" and "we simply have a very high bar"? How do you do it in a way that doesn't impact the economy too much (like forcing employers to do stupid things like auto-write everyone back and waste even more of their time in order to appear to actually be hiring)?
It just makes many services such as Credit Karma unavailable to anyone but the first person to signup.
The people in charge of pay and hiring will never, ever, ever set things up such that they're considered less important or are paid less.
Seen it many times where engineers are making more than their managers. I had jobs where there was no real difference between my pay and my direct manager's.
There were fewer programmers for each programmer's role than managers for each manager's. Not sure if it still applies though.