The lump of labor fallacy is a fallacy not real. Phrased another way, demand for software is more or less infinite so if coding agents make everyone a 10x engineer eventually we will easily find use for 10x more software.
Sure, but that’s not infinite. It’s always a zero sum game: if someone is playing my game then they're not playing yours (even if someone else might be)
> demand for software is more or less infinite so if coding agents make everyone a 10x engineer eventually we will easily find use for 10x more software.
I remember when Gizmodo just posted cool technology stuff. I even had my stuff featured on their website a couple of times.
Edit: I haven't been on Gizmodo for a long time. Do they also have a rule saying you can't criticize them?
This inspired me to checkout Hackaday again. Thankfully they still just post cool tech stuff (even after they sold the website a few years back). I'm not cool enough to have my stuff featured on HAD though lol.
I didn't vote on your comment but consider that people might just find the comment nonconstructive or uninteresting (which is what the guidelines say to base votes on) rather than that there is a "rule against criticising Gizmodo"
Like so much in today’s world, this is kinda Peter thiel’s fault.
He bankrolled the Hulk Hogan lawsuit against Gawker as revenge because they reported on him being gay. The judgement forced gawker into bankruptcy where it was scooped up by private equity. The new managers gutted the place and forced the writers and editors to publish clickbait garbage instead of doing journalism.
That’s why Gizmodo looks nothing like what you remember.
Freedom of the press, like freedom of speech, applies specifically to government intervention. As a private citizen, you are free to dislike or disapprove of what is being reported. That’s all your parent comment did, they didn’t call for censorship or infringing on freedom of the press, they simply displayed discontent with one case of tabloid-like news.
Right, I forgot that the press needs to conform to your preferences on what they publish. It also slipped my mind that the court system wasn't government run.
Unless you're asserting that you're the government?
> Coldcard’s software is built on MicroPython, and Coinkite supplies its own hardware-RNG wrapper for the device’s STM32 chip. To avoid conflicts, Coinkite deliberately disabled MicroPython’s built-in RNG path by setting a configuration flag, MICROPY_HW_ENABLE_RNG, to zero. The problem: the underlying library checked only whether that flag was defined, not whether it was enabled (set to a non-zero value). Because a flag set to zero is still “defined,” the build silently compiled against the wrong code, and seed generation fell back to a deterministic software pseudo-random number generator called Yasmarang
Idk if they still do this, but a long time ago I had a Brother inkjet that wouldn't print black and white if one of the color cartridges was empty (cyan iirc).
That's also a possible factor in why those sitting in the rear half of the plane during a crash are more likely to survive - they have the front of the plane as the crumple zone.
Although for trains, it looks like the middle might be the safest (in case of a rear-end collision).
We don't know yet, of course, but I have the impression that the century in which things changed most was the century from about 1865 to about 1965. Stuff seems to have slowed down a bit since then. But it's all subjective, really: it depends on what you think is important.
Agree. For the drama of it, I'd move the end-date up to 1969, just to catch the moon landing.
My great-grandfather learned to care for horses, and drive a wagon / buggy, and keenly remembered the first time he saw an automobile. He qualified as a doctor before antibiotics were invented, and then lived long enough to at least exist in a house with a personal computer - whether he ever used it is something I never thought to ask my grandfather!
1969 is a big year due to man landing on the moon. Cars becoming ubiquitous (they certainly were a luxury item well into the sixties here). 1970s gave us the integrated circuit and arguably the start of modern computing. 1980s the collapse of the Soviet Union, genetic research. 1990s: well, I can go on :P
I was too young to appreciate (denotative, not connotative) the dotcom crash. I will have my popcorn ready this time - for whichever direction it goes.
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”
Just like other advances in technology have replaced jobs, AI will replace jobs.
I'm sure the elevator opperators lamented push-button controls that anyone could just press too.
It sucks, but I imagine most programmers are smart enough to be able to pivot careers or how they do their jobs.
reply