I find it much easier to use AI to vibesplit my firewood. Sure, it costs me lots of money to buy axe tokens, and sometimes all I end up with is a useless pile of splinters or sawdust, but it's the way of the future; just imagine how efficient it'll be when the tech has matured?
You're right, and I'm sorry. You specifically instructed me to split the logs in the side yard, and I split the cat. I recognize now that this was a strategic error, and cutting the cat into chunks does not accomplish the goals.
edit
AGENTS.md
+ Only chop things made of wood. Meat does not split well. NEVER cut up the cat.
I've updated the AGENTS.md file to track this mistake in the future. Should I continue chopping the rest of the firewood?
The new model is so good at splitting firewood that it's too dangerous to release to the public without safeguards to stop it from splitting things that aren't actually firewood. The old models are terrible - I can't believe we ever thought they were good.
Remember: this is the worst that splitting firewood will ever be.
I'm right there with you. I've manually split wood with wedges when I was a kid. It was tedious. Now I just use the wedges for felling the trees. I get enough exercise from the stacking.
I've always felt the attraction to manual splitting was some idyllic vision of country life, backed up by the movie trope where characters are having "alone time" but still "being strong". I'd be interested to hear if anyone in this thread burns a significant amount of wood (say 4 cords), and actually splits it all by hand.
Not if you also want to get excellent exercise. It would take me no time at all to build a splitter for my tractor if I wanted one, but I plan on chopping by hand until I can't because otherwise I will either be significantly less fit or have to take out additional non-productive time to workout.
When was the last time you used Google? The first entry (and a few after that) is always spam.
Anyone who does a search and accepts the first answer just doesn't care much or is incompetent. Anyone with any critical thinking whatsoever does way more than that if they want a correct answer.
Google searches are still part of my everyday use if you're a power user like me that ctrl/cmd+L to the browser bar and the first auto complete is a web search rather than a bookmark or history item
I bet lemmings are grateful they were left behind.
It beggars belief that people think that they should rush in some uncertain direction, like some drawbridge is going to be lifted the moment people work out what the right direction is. It's utter stupidity.
Every single person who bootstrapped becoming powerful did it by rushing into things, but it's a high variance strategy because you could also end up destitute
It's funny lately I've been seeing the cursor advertisements all with some premise of regular young person wants to develop an app and the ads really do focus on the simplest of premises: the only ones I've seen in these skits are essentially variants on the "todo app" web app tutorial
the tech is pretty good at helping identify simple bugs when they happen and to write short sections of code given very explicit instructions but yeah I have yet to see good examples of short one sentence ideas turned into a working product that looks better than anything that could be a UDemy tutorial app.
If a job or task can be automated, it should be automated. That process increases productivity which is good for the economy and society.
The mistake people make is thinking AI is going to lay waste to almost all employment.
It may change many jobs and eliminate some but see above. If you live in a (functioning) democracy the notion is politically improbable. That's not to say there are not people who will vote against their own interests, again and again, even after being screwed each time. The point is that being politically aware, savvy and organized is an important part of surviving. This was always the case, but recent events make this starkly obvious.
On top of that AI projections are currently a form of mass hysteria or greedy fantasy, depending on if you see yourself as labor or capital. Both utterly unhinged from reality.
Realistically, almost 1/4 of the world don’t live in a democracy. And probably another 1/4 of the world doesn’t live in a functioning democracy. By your logic, does that mean half of the global population actually ARE at risk of AI laying waste to almost all employment?
I am by no means an AI doomer, and I use frontier models to a great extent every day as part of my job…
But those at the top of the corporate food chain, those who own and profit from the AI companies themselves, will reap the rewards of this technology.
Maybe there won’t be a dramatic elimination of jobs. But even if there isn’t, the overwhelming majority of the “value” will be going to the 1% and the working class will benefit not.
Heads they win, tails we lose.
AI will not meaningfully improve the standard of living or the quality of life of the everyman. But it will funnel even more of his share of the profit from his work to his corporate paymasters.
Previously we had strikes, powerful unions and even revolutions. There will be none of that this time round.
> If you live in a (functioning) democracy the notion is politically improbable.
Anyone with even a hint of interest in labour movements in western countries probably knows that there is no such thing as a democracy working well enough to protect workers when push comes to shove.
I don't know, what am I gaining from listening to the 100th anti immigrant/POC/trans/gay/poor-person rant? For some reason people feel comfortable telling me this sort of shit. Maybe I look like a bigot.
Interacting with the general public absolutely sucks.
China is shifting it's coal use from direct burning in coal power plants to coal based oil, gas and chemicals, reducing the need for energy imports that could be cut off in a conflict. Carbon, in form of CO2, will still be released to the atmosphere from this products.
"We think that managers who have absolutely no interest in going either long or short Elon will need to collectively buy $8.5bn of SpaceX stock on the 19th June, a further $1bn on 26th June and a final $4.7bn on July 3.
And so we’re talking a cumulative, de facto mandated $14.2bn of mutual fund and ETF orders by July 4 to avoid having to take a view on Elon. That number would’ve been around $11bn higher if the S&P 500 index committee had leaned a different way. But it’s $13.2bn bigger than the $1bn it would’ve been if index committees had sat tight on their existing fast-track methodologies."
If you think about it, the more people pay for these new and more resource hungry models, the longer it takes for them to become no extra cost and the longer it takes the more people are tempted to pay extra.
Neither mine, I have a machine that does it for me. Much safer and efficient.
reply