One of the most interesting aspects is when LLMs are cheap and small enough so that apps can ship with a builtin one so that it can adjust code for each user based on input/usage patterns.
The clear intent is to stop allowing regular people to be able to compute...anything. Instead, you'll be given a screen that only connects to $LLM_SERVER and the only interface will be voice/text in which you ask it to do things. It then does those things non-deterministically, and slower than they would be done right now. But at least you won't have control over how it works!
Weather or not the intent is as nefarious as you suggest, that type of UI is going to be a boon for a lot of people. Most people on the planet are incredibly computer illiterate.
I'm not sure that making the computers easier to use for "most people" has had a net positive effect on society. If an ability requires effort and discipline to attain, perhaps fewer people would take it for granted and care more about its quality.
No, I hate that idea. Saying "only those who have earned it through effort and discipline should be allowed to do X" goes against how I want most of the world to work.
Let's keep that kind of regulation to pursuits like flying helicopters, not using computers.
This is almost a willful misinterpretation of what I said. I didn't say it should be regulated or illegal. I just expressed a thought that perhaps we shouldn't reorient everything around making things easy for the laziest among us.
Fair enough. I have a bit of a trigger finger reaction to anything that hints at suggesting that regular people shouldn't be trusted to use this stuff.
Imagine what they could achieve with a non-deterministic computer that requires extremely detailed requests and weird language tricks to be convinced to do what you want!
If this could ever happen, there will be no point in GUI apps anymore, your AI assistant or what have you will just interact with everything on your behalf and/or present you with some kind of master interface for everything.
I don't see a bunch of small agents in the future, instead just one per device or user. Maybe there will be a fleeting moment for GUI/local apps to tie into some local, OS LLM library (or some kind of WebLLM spec) to leverage this local agent in your app.
>If this could ever happen, there will be no point in GUI apps anymore, your AI assistant or what have you will just interact with everything on your behalf and/or present you with some kind of master interface for everything.
sort of how the hammer is the most useful tool ever and all we have to do is to make every thing that needs doing look like a nail.
Agents will still have to communicate with each other, the communication protocols, how data is stored, presented and queried will be important for us to decide?
Will we stop using web browsers as we understand them today in the next few decades in favor of only interacting with agents? Maybe.
a new kind of operating system, that instead of having all those annoying apps, will just be an agent, that does whatever stuff you need|want|it can - why not? But still, we gonna need to be able to maintain many contexts, access remote servers, local file system, sort, present data, be it local or remote. One screen, one button, philosopher's stone made of silicon
I've heard this referenced multiple times and I have yet to hear the value be clearly articulated.
Are you saying that every user would eventually be using a different app? Wouldn't it eventually get to the point that negates the need for the app developer anyways since you would eventually be unable to offer any kind of support, or are we just talking design changing while the actual functionality stays the same? How would something like this actually behave in reality?
These are valid points, taken to the extreme we will have apps that cannot be supported.
In short term, we already have SQL/reports being automated. Lovable etc is experimenting with generating user interfaces from prompts, soon we will have complete working apps from a prompt. Why not have one core that you can expand via a prompt?
I am currently studying and depending heavily on Anki, its been amazing to use Claude Code to add new functionality on the fly. Its a holy mess of inconsistent/broken UX but it so clearly gives me value over the core version. Sometimes it breaks, but CC can usually fix it within a prompt or two.
The goal of the scheduling algorithm is to predict the optimal time for when you need to review your card again. FSRS has a bunch of parameters tja you can customize based on previous learning attempts, usually a few 100 cards is enough to adapt to your own learning abilities, but in current Anki versions you need to manually update the parameters to optimize your learning.
No kidding, it is really good especially with htmx which helps you get some of the advantages of a full SPA without the complexity of a separate frontend.
Been building a project in the side to help my studies and it usually implement new complete apps from one prompt, working on the first try
Yeah, I've noticed it regularly suggests htmx (and perhaps something light like alpinejs or some vanilla JS glue logic) to build powerful yet simple interfaces in Django. And it seems to get them right - saving you a lot of time.
It is probably good a HTMX for the same reason it is good at Tailwind CSS; HTMX puts the functionality on the elements being reasoned about (e.g. click this button, load the result here).
I personally choose Django as often as I can, the tooling is considerably better and the ecosystem is significantly larger. Admin is a killer app until you know exactly what you're developing. It's trivial to setup tests with pytest-django, use with a mypy via django-stubs, with django-ninja you can fastapi like routes and models based on pydantic, etc etc etc.
GNOME was started on 15 August 1997 by Miguel de Icaza and Federico Mena as a free software project to develop a desktop environment and applications for it. It was founded in part because the K Desktop Environment, which was growing in popularity, relied on the Qt widget toolkit which used a proprietary software license until version 2.0 (June 1999). In place of Qt, GTK (GNOME Toolkit, at that time called GIMP Toolkit) was chosen as the base of GNOME. GTK is licensed under the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL), a free software license that allows software linking to it to use a much wider set of licenses, including proprietary software licenses. GNOME itself is licensed under the LGPL for its libraries and the GNU General Public License (GPL) for its applications.
Ooh I 'member! /. Is filled with stories and comments of people badmouthing Miguel because of his stance of integration between Linux and the Microsoft world. His views appeared always "controversial " to the OpenSource world and the sentiment in /. Was that she was a M$ apologist and that he only wanted to be noticed by M$.
I remember back in the day when he started Gnome with Federico, he got a place in a Time magazine 's list of influential people. I being a kid from the same country, wrote an email telling him I wanted to help building Gnome, and he replied to mee! To me he always appeared a pragmatic person.
I mean, it's always kinda played off like he turned coat. But if you know the history it makes total sense.
He started off with GNOME, got interested in .net and Mono (originally as a means to integrate them into GNOME/GTK) and shifted focused on those. He built a company around that (with others), which then got bought by Microsoft due to their obvious interest in .net (and probably internal talks about the future direction of .net Core). Since then until 2022, his work was mostly on .net and its open ecosystem.
So it's neither contradictory nor counter to his roots, but is humorous when you say "the guy who created GNOME works for Microsoft". Despite the fact that he probably did some major work on bridging the two worlds together and leading to modern MS actively incubating and contributing to Open Source projects.
Come join SparkMeter’s Systems team and help increase electricity access in developing countries. As an Infrastructure Engineer with an automation focus, you’ll build the tools and architecture that will allow us to expand our affordable smart metering systems to new microgrid and central grid utilities.
At SparkMeter, we believe in embracing automation, and our team takes every opportunity to reduce manual work or remove workarounds using tools like Fabric, Chef, and Docker. You’ll officially own automation for the Systems team, creating new tools and taking over the maintenance of existing tools that others across the organization will use every day. This will include improving automation for our software release process, automating the (now largely manual) provisioning of the Linux base stations at the core of our smart metering system, and generally building and maintaining the tools that help make it easy for us to efficiently manage a growing herd of servers and devices.
SparkMeter’s core value is opportunity: the opportunity for underserved communities to achieve great things. That's why our mission is to increase access to electricity in underserved communities - it is electricity and the services derived from it that unlock and create those opportunities. This value is reflected in our hiring ethos: we believe that the strongest teams have diverse backgrounds. Our approach to hiring has been validated by academic and industry studies that show that workforce diversity improves team and business performance. (It has also been validated by the quality of the team we’ve assembled so far!) We encourage applications from members of groups currently underrepresented in software engineering.
I'm sure that the phone operators were very happy to comply to ban, they hate WhatsApp. When WhatsApp first got popular here it ended their very lucrative business of SMS and more recently they introduced VOIP calls which considerably cheaper than normal phone calls, especially long distance.
Three of the major phone operators (Vivo, Claro, TIM) implemented the ban, while the fourth (Oi), did not. The CEO of Vivo, one of the major phone operators, came out a couple of months ago saying that WhatsApp is "piracy", since they are not affected by the same regulations as the normal phone operator.[1]
