deleted by creator

That’s a fair point, improving the subscription feed would be in their best interest for the people who use it, even if that number is low.

The problems with that feed which he touched on in the video are pretty significant. If you subscribe to channels that put out lots of content and ones that rarely do, it becomes much harder to use.

One thing he didn’t mention is also that it’s not conducive to discovering and gradually catching up on the back catalogue of a new channel, which is something the home feed excels at.

I’m sure YouTube prefers you use the home feed and has no plans to improve subscriptions, and there are real issues with it, so it’ll probably continue to decline.

I didn’t think your point was as shallow as “different people can have different opinions”

I fail to see how this invalidates that someone can hold both the position that current AI is a waste of electricity and pumping out garbage while pointing out the potential social and economic disruption of future iterations of the technology.

If your point was simply that some people hold one position, others hold the other, and others still hold both. Then… thanks? I think we can also call this a waste of electricity.

It seems you’re firmly entrenched and going out of your way to see a contradiction. I’ll let you be.

Consider that there’s no widespread double-think happening and it could just be in your own head at this point.

The cars that replaced horses were several iterations in, early “automobile” devices included steam powered carriages that moved slower than walking.

A technology may start with limited usage while still having lots of potential.

Technologies are always useless until they’re not.

Agreed. I’ve been following the technology of neural networks and generative AI since before LLMs were the new hotness and it’s fascinating and powerful stuff.

My qualms with what’s happening now are more about how we organize our economy and society. Rushing them to market, aggressively trying to cull workers, etc. are critiques of capitalism not AI. In a different world we would all be excited about the prospect of having to work less and reap the benefits of AI, but we wouldn’t be reopening coal plants and leaving people to starve on the street.

Early cars weren’t a threat to streetcars and trains and urban planning but modern cars have reshaped every North American city. You can criticize the inefficiency, poor quality, energy waste, etc. of the technology today while also pointing out the dangers of tomorrow.

are those competing?

It’s being rushed to market and is still very inefficient, but part of the reason it’s being rushed to market is because companies are getting ahead of themselves about the opportunity to fire human employees.

Worth noting that this is stored in the repository alongside the code changes and can be referenced in the future if someone is trying to understand that code or fix a bug in that code.

For large projects spanning long periods of time sometimes the best way to find a bug’s cause is to scour the projects history to find out which commit caused the bug to appear, and if that commit doesn’t have a good description you’re unnecessarily disadvantaged when trying to find out why it caused the problem or what assumptions were going into the original code.