[Towaway69]

Definitely the safe space is expanding but how fragile and expensive is this expansion?

AI requires a larger amount of fragile resources to work as opposed to an editor, keyboard and a human.

It some sense it’s a bit like the bitcoin revolution that slowed down once transaction times ballooned out. And blockchains didn’t replace databases as expected. Probably for very good reasons: resources required v. results delivered.

I personally agree that AI is great technology for some great new tools. But we still haven’t found its limits: cost v. results. That happened with bitcoins and blockchains is still outstanding for AIs.

[chickensong]

The resources are definitely an issue. I'm still sucking from the corporate teat, but my hope is that by the time the frontier race slows down and they tighten the screws too much, the local models will be good enough. It sounds like recent local models are already getting pretty good for normal duties, but honestly, if it all goes away tomorrow, that's fine too. I'll go back to the old ways. I'd miss the informational capabilities more than the coding capabilities, but I'm no stranger to man pages.

As an aside, I still think there's a place for blockchains. They're not a good replacement for a typical database, but I think some of the concepts are useful. The idea of distributed ledgers and smart contracts have a lot of applications IMHO, particularly in government. The traceability of transactions seems like a great fit to enable transparency of government spending. Of course, governments are allergic to that idea for the usual reasons, but it's still a nice idea. Distributed computing is hard, and it's a shame that blockchains were usurped by crypto bro scams. I'm still rooting for the folks who are trying to push distributed technology forward though.