← Back to context

Comment by gabrieledarrigo

3 days ago

> Why, I wonder.

By something that is going to replace my job by writing better code and shipping more features at a fraction of the cost, without asking for vacation? I don't know, boss; I'm also trying to understand why I'm tired.

> at a fraction of the cost

We'll see about that, long term. The billions and trillions being wasted right now to get the foot in the door need to be earned back somehow at some point...

"Nice company you have there, totally reliant on our AI tech. Oh by the way we gotta increase the rent again."

  • Doesn't really make sense as there are already open weight models that are close to frontier models, and the compute to run them isn't outrageously expensive, and every indication that it will only get cheaper over time as has been the strong trend in terms of $/outcome.

it's a net positive for the human race

  • is it?

    • Yes. Every great technology developed to date has been a net positive for the human race. Including the more controversial ones, like internal combustion engines or nuclear power. Why should AI be different? I think the critics always fixate on the negatives, but ignore the potential big positives.

      27 replies →

    • we'll be better off - assuming we'll generate revenue on our own. LLMs have opened up an enormous new frontier of micro-SaaS opportunities. One person can now build what used to require a small team.

      The real problem is zero-sum work, especially when the only moat was knowledge asymmetry that is now public knowledge.

      7 replies →