[alganet]

> imagine changing it and programming the computer's life

> imagine that the inputs for the car are on the bottom, and they're going through the software stack to produce the steering and acceleration

> imagine inspecting them, and it's got an autonomy slider

> imagine works as like this binary array of a different situation, of like what works and doesn't work

--

Software 3.0 is imaginary. All in your head.

I'm kidding, of course. He's hyping because he needs to.

Let's imagine together:

Imagine it can be proven to be safe.

Imagine it being reliable.

Imagine I can pre-train on my own cheap commodity hardware.

Imagine no one using it for war.

[serial_dev]

I tried to imagine all that he described and felt literally nothing. If he wants to hype AI, he should find his Steve Jobs.

[msgodel]

It was easy for me to see and it's incredible. Maybe I should be launching a startup.

[alganet]

I can see it just fine, it just doesn't appeal to me.

I want to build things, not "launch startups". If someone asks me about a minimal thing of what I build, I want to be able to speak for hours about it, in detail. I want to completely understand it. I'm an engineer, not an enterpreneur.

This whole concept of Software 3.0 takes away all the craft from the thing. It's souless.

- "How did you do it?"

- "Dunno, just prompted it LOL."

Sounds very dumb to me. Even if you make loads of money off of it.

That's why I also believe it will not be a "gateway drug to software development". That's just a profound misconception of what makes good software developers tick.

They are now trying to sell the idea of control. You can "put it in a leash". It's pathetic. I don't want control, I want to understand it. Internalize it.

One thing that never changed in software development is that _you get the payoff_ for the hard work. You solve the mystery. You figure out how it works, by yourself.

Anyone that looked a little close to AI knows that it doesn't work that way. It's a black box thing. You will never fully get the knowledge payoff.

[msgodel]

Like Karpathy said: it augments software 1.0, it does not replace it. It makes it easier to manipulate and communicate theory to more people. I really don't think people understand how great things could be.

[alganet]

> Karpathy [...]

I'm sure he's a great guy, but let's face it: He's there speaking those things because he made some popular videos in the past and they needed to renew their PR strategy.

Speaking of PR strategy...

> [...] augments [...]

Iron Man does not buy his metal suit at Costco. He builds it, in a cave, with a bunch of scraps. That's the magic of building things.

> I really don't think people understand how great things could be.

That's not the issue. I think it could be great, but they're being greedy and underestimating their best audience.

Instead, they're focusing on complete beginners, in the hopes that those beginners will generate enough monkey-bashing to train a model that can churn good quality "software 1.0" (which is the real deal, so far irreplaceable). I believe that's a mistake.

[msgodel]

Are they focusing on beginners? I think everyone in tech has always been excited about bringing more people in but I don't feel like there's more of that here than anywhere else.

Have you tried building things with this stuff? I have, it's exciting, there's all kinds of new things to build. I haven't been as excited to build things for a while before this.

[Henchman21]

If I’m going to be leaning on my imagination this much I am going to imagine a world where the tech industry considers at great length whether or not something should be built.

[alganet]

Let me be clear about what I think: I have zero fear of an AI apocalypse. I think the fear is part of the scam.

The danger I see is related to psychological effects caused by humans using LLMs on other humans. And I don't think that's a scenario anyone is giving much attention to, and it's not that bad (it's bad, but not world end bad).

I totally think we should all build it. To be trained from scratch on cheap commodity hardware, so that a lot of people can _really_ learn it and quickly be literate on it. The only true way of democratizing it. If it's not that way, it's a scam.

[Henchman21]

I think we fear the same things, roughly. My fear is what humans do with any tech we create. Where we differ is that I would prefer things not be built. After a lifetime of watching what we actually do with the things we create, I think we need a bit of a “time out”. Just my 2 cents that won’t change a thing!

[alganet]

It's already built. It's just not that impressive.

We need to completely own it and remove the control these shady companies have over it.

Karpathy says nothing changed in 70 years of software. Something very important did: free software.