Previously you could quickly filter out low-effort or mediocre work based on qualities of the writing. LLMs break these fuzzy mental filters people have developed, for better or worse.

I expect to see the same thing for cranks in areas where those are a problem.

Probably. But I'm still holding out a bit of hope: with strange eons even Moore's law will die, and we'll suddenly be pushed into new hardware paradigms.

But people have been making predictions about this happening for decades...

that's what my very first blog post on my personal site was about, from over a decade ago :)

jelv.is/blog/Generat...

Some caveats: operations that go from CReal values to normal values (ie Bool) might not terminate

And intermediate values might require more precision than you pull out of the final result

There are some nice intro papers somewhere but I'm on my phone so can't easily find them

Yeah. You can even play with this idea in Haskell

hackage.haskell.org/package/numb...

I remember Conal had some ideas for how future adaptable hardware (FPGAs that could reconfigure dynamically at runtime) would let us do computable reals in hardware.

I always loved that concept, even if it (still!) seems decades ahead of its time. But maybe one day...

This reads like a panic move for Chegg because ChatGPT has eaten their lunch.

is it knowledge workers confusing that, or are they just responding to their managers who confuse it?

honestly, I've seen both, but the latter seems to have a much larger impact

On certainty of outputs: the Fordist instinct to demand "when will thing be Done" serves no purpose beyond dashboard/report curation, which has replaced actual management work in most orgs. It displaces all other value of the thing except for Done-ness. My Button talk on Thursday is about this.

I'm just realizing my current role has a similar dynamic, which is why I've been almost totally demotivated about work :/

For recursion, I found learning from algebraic data types + pattern matching *way* more intuitive than numbers (or even sets/etc).

I imagine there's something similar for induction.

Probably not.

Unless something special happens, either folks are going to lose steam or leadership is going to start flailing around. Neither is great.

Maybe it's just me, but low motivation and anxiety from others end up highly affecting me, even if I'm in a reasonable place *for myself*.

From reading the translator's bio and notes, he is literally that one grad student

If not for his exact intersection of interests, no way the book would have made it into English :P

(And, clearly, the book was *very* hard to translate!)

I've started picking up random books at bookstores and while most of them didn't resonate, some of the niche books have been totally wild

Most memorable example so far: Rip It Up by Kou Machida, a very postmodern novella by a Japanese punk rock musician

www.goodreads.com/book/show/59...

not really, I was just an intern :P

My view is that it's primarily the latter.

You could have a better tool like Linear, but anything following the same paradigm of seeing work in terms of discrete individual tasks will encourage the same unhealthy tendencies from both managers *and* ICs.

yeah, no point worrying unless the symptoms get worse, like trying to design stack-based instruction sets in hardware :P

this is one of those things where I can't tell whether it's so obvious nobody even bothers talking about it, or it's not obvious to most people :/