• 0 Posts
  • 387 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 26th, 2024

help-circle
  • Not only would an engineer not need to consider the abstraction layer between their input and the code but they would be unable to fully interrogate that abstraction because the code extruder does not need to show its work.

    I think you’re actually right on the money here, nowhere near delusional, especially since you come from a Lisp background. I really appreciate Lisp (and Smalltalk) for the “live-coding” and universal inspectability/debuggability aspects in the tooling. I appreciate test-driven development as I’ve seen it presented in the Smalltalk context, as it essentially encourages you to “program in the debugger” and be aware of where the blank spots in your program specification are. (Although I’m aware that putting TDD into practice on an industrial scale is an entirely different proposition, especially for toolchains that aren’t explicitly built around the concept.)

    However, LLM coding assistants are, if not the exact opposite of this sort of tooling, something so far removed as to be in a different and more confusing realm. Since it’s usually a cloud service, you have no access to begin debugging, and it’s drawing from a black box of vector weights even if you do have access. If you manage to figure out how to poke at that, you’re then faced with a non-trivial process of incremental training (further lossy compression) or possibly a rerun of the training process entirely. The lack of legibility and forthright adaptability is an inescapable consequence of the design decision that the computer is now a separate entity from the user, rather than a tool that the user is using.

    I’ve posed the question in another slightly less skeptical forum, what advantage do we gain from now having two intermediate representations of a program: the original, fully-specified programming language, as well as the compiler IR/runtime bytecode? I have yet to receive a satisfactory answer.






  • Somebody vibe-coded an init system/service manager written in Emacs Lisp, seemingly as a form of criticism through performance art, and wrote this screed in the repo describing why they detest AI coding practices: https://github.com/emacs-os/el-init/blob/master/RETROSPECTIVE.md

    But then they include this choice bit:

    All in all, this software is planned to be released to MELPA because there is nothing else quite like it for Emacs as far as service supervision goes. It is actually useful – for tinkerers, init hackers, or regular users who just want to supervise userland processes. Bugs reported are planned to be hopefully squashed, as time permits.

    Why shit up the package distribution service if you know it’s badly-coded software that you don’t actually trust? 90% of the AI-coding cleanup work is going to be purging shit like this from services like npm and pip, so why shit on Emacs users too? Pretty much undermines what little good might come out of the whole thing, IMO.















  • if realized, this allows volkswagen group to manufacture regular cars for a long, long time even after oil refining stops. originally, it was proposed as a hypothetical luxury product for antique car owners, because it’s physically possible, but doesn’t make sense in energy or cost terms.

    If VW is trying to mainstream this, that tells me they’re scrambling to keep milking the premium end of their portfolio that relies on extravagant IC engines (Porsche, Lamborghini, Audi etc.). Very bad sign for them, as the ID Buzz van looks to be a complete failure to the point of “pausing” production, and VW Commercial Vehicles is their backbone in Europe, much like Ford relies on truck sales in the US. I watched a video a few weeks ago that discussed how their European van/utility vehicle portfolio is aging and totally fragmented, to the point that they are selling rebadged Ford Transit vans manufactured in Turkey. I thought it was bad when they were badge-engineering Dodge Caravans for the US market for a few years, but totally bungling the EV van rollout in Europe is seriously bad business for them.

    It was also hilarious how the rich guys on the Porsche forums were bad-mouthing the rather sexy Mission X EV supercar concept a couple years ago. No matter how cool a 9,000-rpm flat-six is, letting yourself be driven by the guys who just want you to keep making that forever will not stave off everyone else (now including China and Vietnam!).