The tricky thing about that is it depends "what period of time" you choose to look at. When the Serbs had the upper hand in the 90s, yes - a lot of the aggression was due to their actions... But if you choose to look 50 years before that, it was the Croat ustazi allied with Nazis slaughtering Serbs wholesale, to the point where even the Nazis themselves were appalled... A little while before that, it was the Bosniaks/Muslims impaling everyone else with the backing of the Ottomans.
It's more accurate to say "whoever had the upper hand at a given time" was using their temporary advantage to terrorize the others over the last couple centuries.
Given this, it's easy to understand why Serbs wouldn't want their friends and families living in states administered by people who were massacring them with the backing of Nazis and/or Ottomans within a generation.
It doesn't justify the atrocities of the Milosevic era, and it's still technically correct that "yes, the Serbs were the lone bad guys" but only if you choose to look at a certain decade and pretend history doesn't exist before that: which is very much how the American news media at the time "sold it" to justify U.S. involvement in the region.
Fitting - as this is likely emblematic of the way America is failing more broadly: we can't fix real problems with pipes, roads and other infrastructure because we created a generation (s) of people who were taught to look down on that kind of work. And we're at the end of our ability to fund adequate fixes to those things with national debt.
> we can't fix real problems with pipes, roads and other infrastructure because we created a generation (s) of people who were taught to look down on that kind of work.
The problem:
"It's people's fault" (tm).
"The Solution" (by B Brecht):
“Would it not be simpler, for the government, to dissolve the people, and elect another?”
Seriously, why not AI as a solution? That's where all the capital goes... how do you fix anything without capital?
Every single river is a sewage. Beaches have untreated human faeces, sometimes swimming in the sea is a risk to life because of sewage-borne illnesses.
Decades of capital extraction and the governments trying really really hard not to see it.
I'm not really pro-UK or pro-anything in Europe, but most of Europe was built out before modern sewage treatment. Or for that matter the germ theory of disease. It's more than easy to understand why rivers have untreated sewage is dumped into rivers. At the time of construction, it was state of the art.
The US in unusual in that most of it's population boom happened after modern sanitation. Yet we still have areas that discharge sewage into rivers on and ongoing basis.
Why would I need this tool if I can just say "Claude, make me a CAD drawing of XYZ"?
Not trying to be rude, just generating some empathy for the OP's situation, which I think was missed: Like them, there is something you are passionate about that there is no longer really a point to. You could argue "but people will need to use my tool to generate really _good_ CAD drawings" but how much marginal value does that create over getting a "good enough" one in 2 minutes from Claude?
I feel sorry for bringing this up, but I think you might have missed how the thing that makes this possible makes it unnecessary.
No need to be sorry - you raise an excellent point!
Note my critique was labeling all of us LLM enthusiasts by association ”incompetents” which I believe is an incorrect assumption.
The point raised that more people can now code I think was a correct one though.
I think that’s a net benefit.
Let me be brief. There are two topics here - CAD & AI and AI & society which I think the underlying point we are discussing.
I appreciate you made a domain specific example, but like _all_ AI workflows - it does not really hold up unless one is extremely specific what the workflow is.
First of all if someone is making a CAD tool for drawings that’s really not a segment. All 3D design tools target a specific content workflow, with specific domain model. Drawings are one possible output from this domain model - just like the on-screen 3D presentation or a 3MF file you get for export.
What ever LLM competency level is it does not come with it’s own domain model. Real people want to configure the models they create. This means there needs to be a domain model you hook up to the LLM to have stable model with specific editable components.
So if you are prompting a model, you are still better off if you prompt the domain model in a real cad package.
So I don’t think CAD packages will die.
Second - I’m mainly trying to serve _my_ need (which I believe is shared by others). My need is that I want to design 3D models with minimum effort, in an enviroment that has perfect undo, perfect boolean, versioning, snaphshotting and intuitive parametricity. This package did not exist in the market before.
Will it have traction? I would expect there are lot of human users that want to create models themselves. Computer chess did not kill chess etc.
To be super specific, there is a clear wedge in the market between Tinkercad and Fusion360 for an affordable desktop offering with the above features.
I do realize my market thesis is just a hypothesis at this point. Which is fine - it’s a passion project. I hope it will be usefull for others, but if not, at least I will have the tool I want.
I’m mainly excited about the possibility of being able to ship to test my market hypothesis.
Without LLM tools I would not be able to ship.
Regarding society:
I believe we are discussing a normal destructive phaze of innovation cycle. Machine looms, weavers, luddites, new forms of labour etc.
Regarding living standards the main worry is - can ”normal” people exist above poverty?
I guess the markets will want to have consumers in the future so either there will be new jobs or some form of basic income.
50 years ago, the U.S. was a nation that _made things_ whereas today it's primarily people conference calling and making slide decks for each other (perhaps not for long, given the progress of LLMs). What if that's the real underlying problem and not how many layers of people we can stack on top of each other in a small space?
The risk profile is "exposed to asbestos" which - as the video correctly pointed out - was _never banned_ despite the well-known risks. It's a common misconception that asbestos was banned (because it seems like it should be) but it never was thanks to industry interests.
Remember when they "censored" the guy who had the gall to write "men and women are a little different" at Google. There's an object lesson here, even if you disagreed with that guy.
Nurse Chapel, and "Number One"* from the original series' original pilot, The Cage. Both of these characters are main cast in SNW, sadly no mind-swap plot with these two has happened yet.
* I don't think she had a full name at that point?
In fairness to the author, I think their point was that you take _several_ agents (not just one) and find a way to have them work like a team of 20 people. In the example, Sarah is trying to do the same job she did before, just marginally better.
Yea I guess that's accurate but they also explained that AI capabilities advance every 6-12 months and managing a team of agents buys you a few years. So their proposed solution and conclusion that it keeps you safe for years makes no sense right now. Multi agent orchestration, with an agent doing the orchestrating, is all the craze nowadays.
They made half the point, in my opinion - that you should be "doing the thing that wasn't possible before" but missed the other half - that maybe the thing you should be doing is owning and creating relationships with customers yourself instead of doing it through a company... Which maybe wasn't possible before but is now.
I agree. But the article then seems to suggest, 'you be the one left standing to orchestrate'. It didn't offer much of a suggestion about the other 20 people that would be gone.
It seemed to come down to the old 'just work better , faster, cheaper' , but that is dialed up to 11 now.
I read it more as "look for the thing that was _never done_ because no one was going to hire 20 people to do it" and all the examples were pointing out how you _should not_ try to "better, faster, cheaper" AI because you will lose quickly on all those dimensions.
I realize the irony, of course, that this article is AI-generated but it provoked something close to an epiphany for me even so.
Let's not pretend that firing software engineers for reading a publicly available Slack list with software is anything but the crack of a whip. Or equivocate doing that with firing _700 people_ while the board gets their million-dollar yacht bonuses.
Remember back when they built these businesses out of thin air, they would hire for the type of personality that would hack together something pointless like this.
It's more accurate to say "whoever had the upper hand at a given time" was using their temporary advantage to terrorize the others over the last couple centuries.
Given this, it's easy to understand why Serbs wouldn't want their friends and families living in states administered by people who were massacring them with the backing of Nazis and/or Ottomans within a generation.
It doesn't justify the atrocities of the Milosevic era, and it's still technically correct that "yes, the Serbs were the lone bad guys" but only if you choose to look at a certain decade and pretend history doesn't exist before that: which is very much how the American news media at the time "sold it" to justify U.S. involvement in the region.
reply