I'm not talking necessarily about college, I'm talking about getting proper learning space when the new job is significantly different, which is the point of the discussion.

I personally like self learning, but I've met way too many cases of managers that were great engineers and awful at people management. At the end of the day the truth is nobody explicitly taught them the new required skills.

We shouldn't base the system on their first reports being guinea pigs while the manager wings it.

GLM 5.3 is far ahead of anything Cohere has ever released, and it's relatively easy to host.

If one provides it access to the wiki and reddit, if just from within game it's quite cryptic

"effectively" is doing some heavy work in this sentence

It's so fascinating that people think that AGI will be winner-take-all. If anything the Chinese labs have shown us is that being first is almost a handicap as everyone can quickly learn from your released models and distil into open weights quite easily. If the competitive environment continues to exist how it is today, there doesn't seem like a trillion dollar market for anyone.

Disassembly and deep inspection of binaries seems like a good example, or rewriting an existing codebase in rust. You can do it yourself but if you don't have the background there's a ton you need to learn.

Okay, somewhat fair point, if you have no idea how to do X and learning to do X takes a non-trivial amount of time, then using a large language model could probably get you there a million times faster in some cases. But I would want to exclude those cases because they make the speed-up meaningless and instead assume that the user is reasonably competent to do the task.

Sure but that’s probably 100x max? It won’t magically work, there’s a lot of (auto) review and verification that has to be carefully setup, so things actually work in the way you need them to. I’ve done it, it takes days until it’s good.

Or instead of hamstringing your entire way of life and making things immeasurably harder.. we could regulate them too.

The economics of game development is uniquely brutal. You can't just hit it out if the park once or twice and make a classic you can earn residuals from, people move on quickly and you don't earn on repeated playthroughs.

You can make a complete masterpiece, and build it cheaply - but there's no guarantee you can do it again.

That's why there was such a massive push towards live service games and MMOs, or microtransactions - it's quite literally the only way to make one creative effort valuable 1 year post release.

I don't envy folks who make games for a living and I also don't envy the founders and leadership, it just seems do brutally difficult to do well.

> You can't just hit it out if the park once or twice and make a classic you can earn residuals from, people move on quickly and you don't earn on repeated playthroughs.

Unless you're Valve, in which case you sell companion cube plushies until the end of time.

What's crazy is that portal started as a tech demo, and only had about 3 hours of game time (unless you got into speedrunning).

The staying power it's had is unbelievable. Right place, right time, I guess!

The cultural staying power of The Orange Box should be studied in universities.

I've bought Minecraft, Skyrim and KotOR (I/II) on at least 3 different devices, I would say that's residual.

I think it's more the economics of capitalism in general and private equity in particular. EA is more like PE now than a game publisher.

Needing (or wanting?) to continuously earn money (or some other thing one can trade for goods and services) seems like a human or physics thing, not a capitalism thing.

Do they share latency / concurrency figures (aka the deployment shape that gets them that token/s/cluster? Would be interesting if they're using deepEP/WideEP + PP and TP