I'd guess this is a bet on which market is more lucrative:

* domain experts paying for tooling that will enhance their productivity

* capital/management class hoping to significantly replace domain experts

Software devs have been a famously tough market to sell tools to for a long time, so the better bet is B. Plus, the story on B is fantastic for fundraising; if there's a 10% chance that it checks out, you want some part of that as your capital portfolio.

I don't think they actually care if it ever materializes. They just have to sell execs on it. As long as they can the exec will sell it to their higher ups, mostly by just flat out lying about it.

I see it all the time at the Director and VP level. Once big money is on the line, there are no failures, just "opportunities for strategic realignment"

Not much faith required on this one: either a given priest will have both strong familiarity with congregational context and the ability to articulate it as instructions to an LLM or they’ll be missing one of those two. If they’re missing the context themselves, well, they can’t feed it to the LLM and best case scenario is probably that they engage the process closely enough the whole way to learn something from it. If they lack the ability to articulate the whole context that they know but can intuitively work with it, then they’re more likely to meet needs than the LLM — and I’d guess this is a common case.

I haven't read _Who is Government_ yet (in spite of the fact that it has a better title!) but _The Fifth Risk_ was a fantastically illuminating paradigm-shifting read for me.

"What roads would any dare to tread, what safety would there be in quiet lands, or in the homes of simple men at night, if the Dúnedain were asleep, or were all gone into the grave?"

"politically impossible" is giving up on Americans ability to perceive the national advantage as well as the moral good.

Similarly, the deficit probably has solutions if the electorate is willing to approach thoughtfully and consider the revenue as well as expenditure side.

This may be another way of saying it's impossible, at least until it isn't.

"You'll never go broke betting against the american people" -Matthew Cushman

If anything the culture of the last 30 years has made people dismissive and stupid about copyright — and no one has been more obtuse than an average tech libertarian.

You can spot the worst by really thoughtless ideas like “it’s so easy to make cheap copies now so that means copyright is obsolete!” which is laughably common in tech and tech influenced spaces, but shows a total lack of reflection on the topic - copyright was created as a thoughtful attempt to rebalance incentives in a time when industrialization made copies cheap. Cheap copies made copyright important! Cheaper copies - or fractal remixes - might make it more important.

And it’s copyright proponents who know more than most that it’s not a law of nature but a prosocial bargain that has to be maintained by a prosocial people.

If you’re more “the strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must,” if you’re more “eh, thinking through the incentives balance is hard” or “incentives don’t matter now that AI can do all the progress in the arts and sciences we need”, then yeah, copyright may not make sense, but don’t pretend that the problem is that its proponents just can’t conceive of anything else.

Problem is that A LOT of companies abuse copyright. Examples with known services: - Several years ago I can only buy a lot of ebooks via Kindle Store (they weren't in other places).Actually reading them in Bookfusion (which is my preferred tool) required breaking DRM. - Spotify/Netflix - several years ago they required using their apps/sites only. Now I have to ALSO work around their geoblocks and they don't like this (so...they think I should try very hard to give them more money because they don't want them). There are a lot other services with those problems.

But:Torrent trackers still work same as before. Paid pirate equivalents of Netflix (!) also still work same as before.

Counter example:iTunes Music store/Apple Music and Steam - still works, it looks like Apple and Valme still want my money so they get it.

I used to care about copyright, before AI came and I realised that it somehow does not apply to big corporations mass stealing. If Meta, Alphabet, Microsoft do not care about copyright, why should I?

This is really interesting. Do you think it’s possible server-deployed software could also get similar efficiencies with adequate testing?

Yeah it really doesn’t matter where you build stuff. The big push to CI is from companies that want to sell you a service to do it.

Software should build and test the same everywhere. If you have to use it, CI should only wrap that.

The bigger problem is that our digital gilded age is founded in an entrenched culture organizing and framing support for it. It’s one that has been carefully created with several tracks of effort going back decades (some even a century).

Counterculture is disorganized and shallow, and funding is not as abundant where understanding of this problem exists.

Love this.

There's a sense in which this isn't the most practical choice -- general purpose synths (software or hardware) and libraries available for most runtimes give you all the power you need to create the bleeps and bloops.

But there's also something good about old things and limited things being put to good use, and finding ways for creativity to thrive in constraints.

This... does not seem like separation of concerns.

Not to mention that the data layer seems like the one where you want to keep things most deterministic.

If you really want to run an agent on each created row, you could run this in a replica and stream the replies back to your system of record.

To decouple this the person would have to broadcast nearly every event and rebuild the observer layers elsewhere.

And IMO that's what should be done.

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea and all that, but this is another pgsql "solution" that is tied to the database layer, when it should be in the application layer.

I like to be database agnostic, and while I prefer PostgreSQL on production, I prefer SQLite on the dev layer. You should never have to HAVE TO use a specific database to make your APPLICATION work.

You could replicate and separate your llm-postgres from the system-of-record-postgres.

I am so glad to hear there are working PMs who are aware of this (and if you’re hiring it makes me more interested in considering your employer).