We do need a safe layer for non-engineers to customize apps.
All these clones of Photoshop and similar tools are mostly dead ends, they are experiments to see if you can do it, but there will be a consolidation around regularly maintained and powerful and complete apps that likely also offer support.
These experiments are dead-ends for the most part long-term. Fun play things, but they will not gain significantly user bases.
Isn't this more of an argument to use common OSS choices? Like, encourage people to use Blender for 3d modelling; LibreOffice for documents; Gimp, Krita, or one of the many other art programs for ... art; OBS for simple video stuff; and so on and so forth?
Plugins have long been troubled. It’s hard to make a plugin interface that is actually useful while also not breaking on every app update. And plugins have been such a massive vector for distributing malware.
It’s been meaningless ever since the courts decided the “well-regulated militia” part doesn’t actually mean anything. It was never meant to be carte blanche access to every weapon under the sun
Read the second to last slide. What we need now is *imagination*. You assume the need for new software is fixed and that AI is going to satisfy that need with fewer humans (lower cost), but by lowering the cost we can increase the supply of software!
That means software engineers better start getting creative. If you think your job is to wait for a PM to assign you a well-written researched ticket, you're done. Your job is now to figure out how to make these machines (computers) do whatever we need them to do safely, quickly, at scale, and correctly by applying all your knowledge of computer science and the engineering field of software engineering to an AI prompt.
This doesn't scale, because like in a factory that gets replaced by robots, or in a supermarket with self checkouts, not everyone gets to save their job, regardless.
Also, the increase in output is meaningless when the amount of customers doesn't scale in similar size.
Then there are the constraints of physics, there are so many humans in the planet that actually want to pay for a specific product, or consulting services.
I read the "imagination" as prelude to "Jevon's paradox" for AI. It might be that we simply don't know yet what using AI fully means, and where else it can be used and how. Electricity was initially just for lighting, but now it's everywhere...
How do you know it’s installed right without putting power through the thing? You’re going to turn the breaker off an on for every single switch? NOPE!
It’s definitely what I would do, but I can see the disadvantage if your goal is to get in and out quickly and the switch is on the second floor and the breaker is in the basement.
That would be great, if everyone in society thought about each other as altruistically as those pushing for UBI and stronger safety nets. It's probably achievable in small homogenous countries, not in this vast, heterogeneous, central-government-wary USA.
Some PM realized that agents will not push back against waterfall style project planning, so now we get an agent for all possible versions of waterfall projects.
fair critique but copperhead works as a feedback loop: design, verify, revise and repeat. closer to an engineering control loop than waterfall with an agent on top :)
When it gets to the end of the design loops, can it run simulations and tests, or is that out of scope i.e., for another product? (I didn't notice testing on a very quick peruse, but that doesn't mean I didn't simply miss it)
reply