I don't doubt what you're saying. But as someone who is really not buying into cryptocurrencies, this is exactly what someone who holds a big amount of some obscure cryptocurrency would say.
I've heard good things about monero from a friend. This is not an attack on monero, rather a reflection on the general tone of the message.
That's a terrible argument, the IRS taking an interest in obscure finances is usual. Can't escape from the tax office by trading in obscure things.
Monero is, time of writing, #12 on the coinmarketcap leaderboard [0] and less than 1% of the crypto space by market cap. It's hard to complain about that being called obscure; anyone who gets a feel for crypto by looking at a top 10 coins list isn't going to see it.
Although it is a technological miracle. That coin specifically might do poorly in the long term so I'm not about to call it an investment, but I think it's quite possible that Monero holds a probable entry in the history books in 150 years time.
I think they very well understand that this code was full of bugs but no one cared. Likely was assigned to some junior who was making an entry into the team/repos as a non-critical task.
And it's hard to judge them: I'd also rather focus on real features.
Personally, I'd never build on top of Roblox itself, but... and I hate to say this, if they made a generic 3D service that let you export to any game engine, I think I'd pay Roblox for said tool if it was good enough, which, they have so many games and capital, I could see them pulling that off, I mean they already have a base model.
I would love to see more text to 3D model models that can wire up straight to a game engine, I think we'll see a lot of interesting things, like children prompting the worlds of their imagination into reality, and the 50 million memes that will plague social media.
> I would love to see more text to 3D model models that can wire up straight to a game engine
Same, but none of the models actually have good enough output yet to make that work. Currently they're all aiming to "fake" the niceness by doing modeling+texturing, but when you look at the wireframe, it's pretty clear they're very far of from being usable, even less so in a game where performance matters a great deal, and you can't just YOLO assets however you want, which is what the "text to 3D" models like to do.
Inevitable that we'll get there eventually though, it's miles ahead where it was just 1-2 years ago. I guess my point is that it's not the "3D model > game engine" that is lacking at the moment, but "text > 3D model" that cannot produce high quality enough results.
I wonder if the solution is either an intermediary "model spec" that can render into others (this becomes the target for all these model models), or an LLM style hack where its trained on recreating 3D models using code, I know for CAD (I forget which one it is) there's a CAD program where your models / designs can be written in code.
One weird thing I run into is, I can have Claude make some interesting things with threejs, but translating it to other engines isn't always so great, and its usually raw code. I'm not a 3D guy, I just want to get up and running with things I can code / think of.
but I'd prefer to have an industry expert involved, for the accuracy of the model, model to supervise and co-create model trained on models then would generate a model of a model.
As photographer, I find it hard to work with your model. It's like it has no training and just sits there waiting to be told what to do. I spend more time explaining what I want the model to do than actually working with the model. Maybe I should shell out for a professional model instead of working the the open models hoping to be a professional one day.
Makes sense. Very hard for humans to keep up with LLM-generated code. But LLMs/Agents have no problem with this. So they are using the dev style that would drive their business towards generating more money. A funny concept for a non-profit organization.
I don't see how buggy software directly leads to generating more money? A company being successful doesn't somehow magically make them infallible, 100% rational or immune to making mistakes (as you are implying).
I don't know why people keep harping on buggy software.. it really is the average not the exception. I mean we see this with all the defects in existing software that agents find.
I love how people all pretend that they and most engineers are god like programmers. Sure, some people are really good. My 30 years of experience say that is like 5%, maybe if you are at google or a really good start up, that can creep up to 30-50%.
By far the majority of engineers are not elegant or even really craftsman like. Add to this that unless you are working on a pet project you are usually neck deep in something that has had teams working in it for years.
It creates situations where most engineers don't really know what the code base does below the surface area where they are making feature changes. So work gets cobbled on or patched in where people are comfortable making changes.
All I can say is I would much rather have 3 open Opus 5.5 instances than a team of 3 working for me if we are only talking about delivering high quality code. I don't think that is the only value of engineers, but I think we are at a point where the models have way exceeded average engineer ability. There are still tendencies for "compatability everything" and "don't rock the boat" in the current frontier LLMs that can create architectural issues, but if you know what to look for when working, it isn't generally an issue.
I mean just remember how mush everyone complained about buggy games or MacOs or whatever before LLMs even came around.
I am not implying that at all. All I'm saying is that humans can't keep up with LLM/agent rates of code generation but agents come, so what is unusable for humans is ok for LLMs.
And LLMs being required is very profitable to those who sell LLMs.
> Very hard for humans to keep up with LLM-generated code
Not at all. It's hard to keep up with lines of code per day, i.e. quantity.
It's not difficult for humans to keep up with the quality, and produce far superior quality code by writing it themselves or instructing an LLM what exactly to implement, down to each function's API surface (if typing is the bottleneck).
A lot of you people are forgetting that there's an engineering aspect to programming, and LLMs are really really really terrible at it out of the box.
Let's say you can let AI design and 3D print 1 large real-life bridge per week. Would you say that humans can't keep up? Or would you point out that there's a difference between what civil engineers do and what an LLM with a 3D printer does?
That reminds me of hotmail's 50GB limit that cannot be changed. This created so much pain for some non-technical people I know (missed important emails, then having to spend days deliberating what to delete etc)
I've only learned about them recently from a post about Mineserver. The article was posted to HN on Oct 4, they've passed on Oct 3 but I didn't know this until today.
Realistically, GOG probably is trying to accommodate for the OS running the game. So it is more for the spec of the PC, not the RAM the game itself needs
Well, so its not just bloated software that makes software bloated, but bloated facts, too. Users will see specs like that and go "well, I need to upgrade my machine from 2mb to 8gigs now, d'oh!" ...
I've heard good things about monero from a friend. This is not an attack on monero, rather a reflection on the general tone of the message.
reply