When you write off a car, you don't get the value of a new car, you get the value of the car at the point of time it was written off. So if you write a 3 year old car, you get the value of a 3 year old second hand car. Uncertainty on the price I guess increase financial risk.
But the price has consistently falling, so that would suggest a reduction in the insurance costs. I think it's more likely that drivers reliance on teslas assistant driver programme is likely to cause accidents, the costs of which are likely to dwarf what it costs to replace the Tesla.
Another note worth considering is that state and companies have different roles. Take NASA vs SpaceX. SpaceX launches cheaper rockets. But NASA for example does alot of its work in Alabama, which is supporting a poor regions econonmy and its communities. It might be more optimal to do this in Silicon Valley, or even China but as a government organisation this is part of it's remit. Like wise space science for the purpose of knowledge. SpaceX only remit is cheap rockets. Comparing the two on launch costs which I see alot, misses alot of the purpose of the spending.
"Jobs in Alabama" does not fly anyone to the moon, good engineering does. SpaceX, if we like it or not, does good engineering by making the cost of rockets low, anybody can spend money but not everybody will deliver results and even rarer, people will deliver great results. There is no "social care" in NASA as an acronym.
NASA is a government agency and as a government agency it is used as a vehicle to implement the general purpose of the government.
To put a different example of the point. If the cheapest way to launch items into space was for NASA to buy rockets off Russia, would that be what it would do? No, because government policy includes independent launch capacity.
NASA isn't a private company, it is a tool of government and as such it can have have a wider role in society then a compariable private company will have.
Comparing private schools and state schools is far from easy without going really deep into the subject. Superfically comparing grades without taking into account the self-selecting nature of private education vs state schooling. The school bodies are very different and thus the burden on resources.
If India buys a widget off Brazil it will probably be paid in dollars. Therefore, people need to own dollars. Thus a demand for US debt. This lowers the potential interest rate. Other countries who's currency is not a need for people to buy, their debt is purchased by the attractiveness of its offering (i.e interest rate). If US dollar is no longer required than government bonds have to be attractive. Also, not all sovereign debt is issued in the home countries currency, which means that the printing press doesn't help. US debt is very large, interest repayment are close to military spending. Without the reserve currency that would get worse. Something like 68% of world holding is dollar 17% Euro, nothing else of note.
The other side is that as there is a demand for dollars. The value of the currency is higher than if it wasn't which increases the price of exports and reduce price of imports. Trump might want to weaken the dollar.
That's a big, massive if. I think the more experienced you are, the less net productivity you gain. If you're more senior, is probably very low or even negative. I use ChatGPT every day pretty much, but it has wasted quite a bit of my time.
When it does save me time, it's almost just some boilerplate I didn't have to Google or type out. Honestly, I feel like gen AI pleataued a year or more ago.
LLMs are just really convincing bullshit generators. They look impressive on the surface, and the times when they spit out a whole bunch of useful boilerplate feels like magic, but that stuff isn't super useful for a majority of the work you spend your time doing. Throwing more money at these companies is not magically going to yield AGI. I think the AI CEOs are basicallly selling us a lie.
I think experiences are highly variable based on the person and stack. I'd say I've gotten a ~50% productivity boost. I'm quite senior, make FAANG money.
I work in typescript, rust, and go - mostly typescript. LLM coding is an order of magnitude better at typescript than these other languages. To contrast, LLMs seem mostly useless for rust.
I also use cursor, which is a big jump over other code assistants.
And finally I understand how to prompt LLMs accurately. This is a new tool and from interacting with coworkers in the same codebase I can say many smart people have not yet learned how to use the tools effectively.
But if you just assume that everyone catches up to where I am today with cursor + typescript the change is massive.
One of my co-workers is going all in with one of them in his IDE, as part of a pilot program for using it at our company, and ever since it seems like he's gotten dumber, but by outside metrics he's probably "more productive": Merge requests that don't work (in a whole variety of ways), going really fast by opening new merge requests without fixing the old ones, local changes with no thought to the larger structure, and so on. About half the time I feel like I'm spending more time commenting on these merge requests than if I'd just done it from scratch.
I disagree. The more senior you are, the easier it is to generate something and be convinced that "ok, this is good enough" or "aight, I see these things that need to be changed instantly". Frankly, compared to others, I don't have that much experience (about 10+ish years), but it saves quite a lot of time for me.
It takes a bit time to build intuition around the workflow, but when you get going, it seems surprisingly useful. I was a skeptic before as well, btw.
>Juniors need to learn by falling on their face a few times, if companies don't want to train them then they'll never become seniors.
It's rare that anyone gets trained by a company who doesn't already know something and is pivoting to a new role. It's unfortunate but that's just the way it's always been. Juniors have to be proactive and bust their ass to become mid level, usually by learning new stuff at home through building stuff on their own and reading obsessively. The hardest part for a junior to get is their first paid job, and more often than not, that first job will be at a shit hole. Juniors should take advantage of it and really bust their ass to impress them and improve themselves. Once they get a couple of strong learning years under their belts, it gets a bit easier.
If you are a junior and the company is paying you to learn stuff, consider yourself extremely lucky.
Companies are in desperate need of strong talent. To succeed, juniors need to force themselves to become strong talent.
If there is a finite amount of software to be written in the world, and an increase in productivity of developers than that amount of software is done with less people. Also, if AI allows an non-software person say an marketing person, write a python script to query a few databases. Than the 10 person business data science team might not need a body as they no longer have to deal with the 10% lower level stuff.
I think if there is a finite amount (debatable), we're still nowhere near close to reaching that outer limit. An increase in developer productivity could mean the team does more with the same people, or builds more product that requires hiring more engineers to support.
I'm Irish and the later is more correct. There isn't going to be a major political crisis over this. Irish corporate taxation is to the Irish electorate what the flag is to Americans. It's quasi religious.
The government isn't really blaming lack of money on the housing crisis more they are claiming it takes time.
