Yep. There's also been a relentless push for the past two decades or so to standardize many aspects of software development:

* programming languages (JS)

* frameworks (React)

* open source libraries

* platforms (Web, mostly)

* design systems (shadcn for newer apps)

Guess what makes it easier for automation to come in?

Our need for it to be easy and standard contributed to the success of LLM use in software engineering. I suspect it would have done well without some of those factors, but it may have taken longer.

I read this paper as trying to be as serious as l the folk wisdom around the anthropomorphization of LLMs. Which is to say: not at all. :)

Makes it much easier to use the Internet less. They're poisoning the ground water of the well, effectively.

I thought about "poisoning" in this context as well. Even if there is not that much AI, if there is enough that you start second guessing every other comment, I start thinking what am I doing there.

I love how passive aggressive the page becomes: "You turned off recommendations...we won't show you anything else on here either!"

It's somewhat deceiving practice IMO although it could simply be my insecurity.

Along with the empty page, it says "Your watch history is off" in bold then says "... change your setting ... to get the latest video tailored to you"

It sounds as if I'm missing out on latest videos which, technically true, but I wonder if that wording is necessary. It could've just said "Update the settings here to get recommendations". But of course for-profit companies need to make profit :)

Yeah exactly, they could have made their service useful by showing your subscriptions instead. Yet, they decided to enshittify for people who want choices.

Just a small reminder that we aren't wanted ;)

How I feel about programming is often a reflection of how I feel about my own internal world because it continues to be a part of my identity. Once I found a job that valued my desire to actually build things, things started to sort themselves out rather quickly.

Not saying that's what is going on here, but maybe it is helpful.

The only way many people learn that the stove is hot is by burning their hands on it.

Let them.

More like how do you know when your charming partner is a catfish. Maybe 2 years and when you are living in a friends basement.

I am so over the presumptive blog post tone personally.

Maybe we can just not give it access to production databases ever?

Not picking on you, but AI maximalism has infected tech to the point where we talk about how to stop AI from deleting prod instead of seeing that giving AI access to prod is a foolish idea to begin with.

That is certainly true. Anyone who gives an LLM access to their systems is a fool who will soon find themselves out of a job.

I mean that it’s easy to be careful around a bandsaw because it’s clearly dangerous. The danger with LLMs is that they don’t seem overtly dangerous so you just go right ahead and throw your whole arm in there.

I don't know. The dangers of LLMs are quite well documented by now. It's definitely not a secret.

That clarifies it...thanks!

The most exasperating thing about the incident is how much of the media either tried to pin it on AI and/or Railway. The whole thing only took place because the guy FAFO’d by having AI work with prod directly.

Yet the narrative was mostly not about accountability for him. If I was a dumbass and deleted prod and wrote a post about it, nobody would care. Put an AI in there and all of the sudden it’s newsworthy. Ridiculous.

The takeaway here is to make this sort of scenario impossible in the future. It’s not hard to make that happen, but it might mean you need to manually interact with prod.

Anything else is just gambling.