does this mean that 40% of consumers say it's good? or what?

if that is what that means, i would actually say keep improving... since ai is new and there's a lot of mixed feelings about it, it's understandable that sentiment leaks into ai-enabled products.

that being said, there are /a lot/ of ai chatbot product integrations that are actual dogwater and we should not do them. like the stupid amazon integration that is forced upon me that took up like 30% of my screen and straight up just was worthless.

i think the best ai consumer facing workflows you dont actually directly interface with ai via what is expected to be a human interface like chat - it should do processing in the backend, or it supports a human agent.

"much better" in what way

It is vibe coded in Rust. :)

most-all of the algorithm-served content (not from my friends list) is ad content, even if it's not a meta-served ad.

all content (even those who make legitimate content, if they intend on making a living on content) is just ads packaged in fancy UGC. we've reached a point of no return for ads and user targeting

is this not backwards? salaried employee means you get paid the same amount no matter how many hours you work.

There is a lot of regulatory stuff, particularly around benefits, that push people towards nominally 40hr salaried contracts even if they don't need all 40 of those.

"Salaried" vs hourly is increasingly a scam anyway, but all that benefits stuff is something that would have to evolve. And it could, if people find the political will.

What regulations prevent an employer to give benefits to employees before 40 hours? And how do some employers give benefits before 40 hours despite them?

typically there is a floor, at least de facto.

The contracts I've seen have an explicit floor, not a de facto one. I.E. The contract says the minimum number of hours you need to work. Some countries also have overtime laws which create a ceiling.

Either way it doesn't change that being paid for your output is the realm of entrepreneurship and submitting bids for project work.

Employment contracts are virtually nonexistent here in the U.S. While the norm is “40 hours”, actual requirements vary by employer, may or may not be communicated in writing, and can change at the employer’s whim. If you make under $107,432 per year (which is around starting salary for fresh graduates at FAANG), you are entitled to overtime pay (minimum 1.5x) for hours worked beyond 40 in a week.

At least for my software job in the US, and other salaried jobs I’ve seen, there are explicitly no hours listed, and it’s supposedly based only on your output. In practice though, if your butt isn’t in the seat 40 hours a week or so, and usually more, the boss will be mad.

> Saying “with this transformative new technology, we’re able to deliver 10x the value with half the engineers” is a much stronger message, even though it doesn’t make much sense (if this is true, why not keep your engineers and deliver 20x the value?)

in some orgs it was a good excuse to cut the underperformers. these folks wouldnt deliver 10x value with AI, they would either deliver 0x or -10x (with contributions that the just say no engineer would have normally said no to)

why do we feel that way? it's becoming more and more likely that developments in AI lead to a K graph in experience / value - senior / self sufficient workers will be significantly more valuable than ever.

unless you mean that the quality of domestic workers is declining, which i'd agree in most things (tho for some things like software i think still has a chance)

I don't think the quality of US workers has to decline. The quality of workers in lower CoL places like India simply has to increase, and it has. Both of the companies I've worked for have opened India campuses in the past few years.

I hire for such companies and the quality of US workers vs foreign workers who move here on visas is much different. To be fair, foreign workers who move here on visas tend to be the rich and highly educated of their own country and US workers are more distributed across SES. They also have more education on paper bc they usually need a masters or more to be eligible to work here

The compensation of software tech (especially Silicon Valley) has also gotten much higher over the past number of years in the US compared to disciplines requiring the same level of education/experience both is the US and even Western Europe. I expect this will equalize with outsized tech salaries becoming a thing of the past except for a few individuals with proven track records.

I mean, the same can be said for consulting salaries, HFT salaries, hedge fund salaries, etc., which similar to software engineering only require a bachelor's and have a similarly grueling interview process.

Why would this equalize? As long as software companies make huge profits and have growth capability which the top ones clearly do, what change would make this happen?

Some software companies are making huge profits today. Many software jobs are at companies making returns comparable to other engineering job profits. There's also a supply side. If the market is flooded with a lot of people in it mostly for the money, salaries will supposedly shrink.

we've seen that most of the people who are only in it for the money don't actually bring much value to the company. a lot of middling software engineers are actually a liability. unlike operational work, engineering needs to have a higher bar than just a beating heart and hands

Too simplistic of a hot take. People have families and other reasons _not_ to emigrate. I also know people who moved to big tech companies in the states, worked there for a number of years and then went back home to “emerging countries” to be closer to their roots.

>it's becoming more and more likely that developments in AI lead to a K graph in experience / value - senior / self sufficient workers will be significantly more valuable than ever.

I don't buy this at all, this narrative feels like pure cope to me. The skill ceiling for working with AI tooling is not that high (far lower than when everyone had to write all their code by hand, unquestionably). To me it seems far more likely that software engineering will become commoditized.

I'm sure everyone posting about the supposed K graph believes that they're on the valuable side of it, naturally.

American workers got uppity. Forgot their place. Started protesting company decisions and wouldn't return to office. Hiring may eventually come back but not any time soon. Workers need to be chastised first.

engines are designed to behave in very predictable ways. LLMs are not there yet

Engines are predictable technology. LLMs are fundamentally unpredictable. I somewhat question can you even reach predictability with LLMs. And ensure there is no way to circumvent any controls.

that’s a bit pendantic, there exists such a thing as suburbs. even some rural communities are perfectly reasonable in terms of municipal infrastructure. but we are specifically talking about houses that are miles and miles from the next house that is then miles and miles away etc

Even in "rural regions", there are typically some small towns where infrastructure could be provided to them decently efficiently. It's when every single house is a good distance away from their neighbors that things like running fiber cabling become grossly inefficient.

i use the rpi zero 2 for the IO pins

4b / 5 for the camera stuff.

i don’t think using these boards for just compute makes a lot of sense unless it’s for toy stuff like an ssh shell or pihole