Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #91992 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-09-22 20:08 +0000 |
| Last post | 2026-09-26 14:01 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 203 — 24 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-09-22 20:08 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-09-22 22:39 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-23 00:25 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-09-23 09:41 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-09-23 08:50 -0700
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-09-26 12:50 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-23 23:11 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-23 12:43 +0200
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-09-23 14:09 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> - 2026-09-23 11:55 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2026-09-23 23:00 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-24 01:31 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-09-24 10:07 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-24 19:30 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Anton Antimo <anton@safunu.org> - 2026-09-24 10:39 -0300
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-09-26 13:02 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-09-26 14:51 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-09-27 13:29 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-09-27 19:39 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-11 11:37 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-11 14:56 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-27 09:55 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-09-27 11:01 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-30 07:57 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-09-30 08:40 -0700
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-09-30 20:50 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-30 20:56 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-01 04:21 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-01 08:04 -0700
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-02 00:48 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-02 00:32 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-03 00:51 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-03 02:02 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-03 09:27 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-03 23:21 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-02 12:17 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-02 22:34 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-02 02:57 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-02 12:24 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-02 22:59 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-03 09:02 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-01 04:16 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-03 10:08 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-03 12:06 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-27 12:55 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-09-23 19:24 +0200
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-23 18:28 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-09-23 21:04 +0200
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-09-24 07:16 +1000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-09-24 12:03 +0200
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> - 2026-09-26 17:37 +1000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-27 09:53 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-27 18:56 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-09-28 12:52 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-28 17:21 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-09-28 15:56 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-29 03:30 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2026-09-29 02:20 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-29 03:45 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2026-09-29 12:36 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-09-29 10:51 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-09-29 18:19 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-29 19:38 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-09-29 23:55 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-29 18:54 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-09-29 23:55 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-30 01:14 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-30 02:04 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Chris Abraham <chris@gerriscorp.com> - 2026-09-30 13:27 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-30 15:47 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-09-30 20:17 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-30 20:33 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-01 04:55 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-01 02:01 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-01 11:08 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-02 00:42 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-01 23:49 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-02 12:14 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-02 19:33 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-02 20:44 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-02 22:13 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-03 08:59 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-03 04:11 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-03 20:00 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-04 09:04 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-04 23:47 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-05 10:06 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-04 13:09 +0200
[OT] US politics (was: Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-04 17:16 +0100
Re: [OT] US politics (was: Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-04 18:18 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-04 18:13 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-04 19:33 +0200
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-05 02:46 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-05 10:18 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-04 18:33 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-04 20:42 +0200
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-05 01:24 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-05 23:20 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-06 01:44 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-06 03:56 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-07 01:45 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-07 08:01 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-07 03:32 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-07 11:00 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-07 18:42 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-08 07:45 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-08 20:23 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-08 17:24 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-08 23:59 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Harold Stevens <wookie@bookworm.localdomain> - 2026-10-09 05:00 -0500
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-10-08 23:44 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-09 02:36 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-10-14 14:21 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-14 16:57 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-07 11:58 +0200
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-07 11:33 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-07 11:56 +0200
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-07 11:28 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-08 20:08 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-08 22:06 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-08 17:18 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-08 22:21 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-09 02:48 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-09 02:46 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-10-09 04:21 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-09 18:15 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-09 11:14 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-09 18:27 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-08 17:14 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-08 22:20 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-09 02:55 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-09 02:53 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-06 08:56 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-02 19:32 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-02 20:42 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-03 03:08 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-03 02:05 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-03 01:59 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-03 09:04 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-03 19:57 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-04 09:02 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-04 13:11 +0200
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-03 16:09 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-04 09:08 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-04 10:48 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-04 18:09 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-04 19:35 +0200
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-04 18:59 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-04 20:33 +0200
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-05 01:09 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-05 10:03 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-05 12:51 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-05 02:45 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-05 10:33 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-02 12:13 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-02 19:27 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-02 21:32 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-02 02:49 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-02 12:21 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-02 22:44 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-01 04:50 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-01 11:06 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-02 00:40 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-01 11:03 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Chris Abraham <chris@gerriscorp.com> - 2026-09-29 20:15 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-09-29 10:46 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-24 11:56 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-24 20:00 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-26 02:09 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-09-24 00:18 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-24 01:24 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-24 11:58 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-24 19:47 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-26 02:13 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-24 00:21 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-24 05:53 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-24 03:03 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-24 12:23 +0200
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-24 19:42 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-24 21:56 +0200
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-09-24 23:17 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-26 01:00 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-24 19:39 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-09-24 23:17 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-25 04:36 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-09-25 19:14 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-26 04:01 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-09-26 14:43 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-26 03:51 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-24 03:52 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-24 19:43 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-25 09:17 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-25 17:58 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-26 04:49 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-26 04:15 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-26 09:51 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-26 04:03 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-26 09:42 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-24 12:03 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-24 10:31 +0100
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-24 19:20 +0000
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-26 03:41 -0400
Re: More Lazy(?) Programmers Are Seduced By AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-26 14:01 +0000
Page 9 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 Next page →
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-01 04:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ni674tFhjk6U14@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #92515 |
On Wed, 30 Sep 2026 15:47:17 -0400, c186282 wrote: > Oh, and 'populism', what The People want, is kind of THE def of > 'democracy'. Populism has an interesting history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populist_Party_(United_States) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populist_Party_(United_States,_1984) In '92 Gritz spoke at the University of Montana and I attended. At the time 'oxygen therapy' involving 33% industrial hydrogen peroxide was popular in some circles and he was all for it. A kid with hairy legs and beard stubble wearing his girlfriend's dress tried to troll him but Gritz handled it rather well. I'd earlier been to a Populist Party meeting in AZ and it was obvious they weren't going anywhere. The DAP found their charismatic leader; the Populist Party never did. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Workers%27_Party Gritz lost a little street cred when he attempted suicide with a .45 while sitting in a pickup and missed. He did pop up at Ruby Ridge, the Montana Freemen standoff, and the Terri Schiavo fiasco but never tried politics again.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-01 11:06 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <119lbbu$11uku$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #92515 |
On 30/09/2026 20:47, c186282 wrote: > On 9/30/26 13:27, Chris Abraham wrote: >> On Tue, 30 Sep 2026, rbowman wrote: >>> MAGA is a long way from the far right -- and I don't say that to defend >>> MAGA. >> >> I see MAGA as a populist coalition using the Republican ticket to gain >> presidential power. > > It is a large number of people who, more or less, > agree on some basic perspectives and goals to > improve the USA. The GOP is far more into the > same kinds of ideas as MAGA. > > Oh, and 'populism', what The People want, is > kind of THE def of 'democracy'. > Populism is not quite 'the majority of people' : In most cases it is used to describe a rather fanatical element of society who take matters into their own hands and disregard the law and due process under the guise of 'people power'. Trump and MAGA are a minority, but sadly the GOP was seen as e better alternative than the Dimmoclots, *even with Trump* as a kind of president, by the majority of voters -- Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-02 00:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ni8cskF1a8lU6@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #92558 |
On Thu, 1 Oct 2026 11:06:54 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > Trump and MAGA are a minority, but sadly the GOP was seen as e better > alternative than the Dimmoclots, *even with Trump* as a kind of > president, > by the majority of voters We don't suck as much as the Democrats is a warn out strategy. I've voted for the GOP candidate the majority of the times for close to 60 years. The GOP has failed to deliver for close to 60 years. 'If only we had Congress and the presidency!'. That has been the case for the past two years but that do-nothing cunt in the Senate has kept a lid on it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-01 11:03 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <119lb4v$11uku$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #92506 |
On 30/09/2026 18:27, Chris Abraham wrote: > On Tue, 30 Sep 2026, rbowman wrote: >> MAGA is a long way from the far right -- and I don't say that to defend >> MAGA. > > I see MAGA as a populist coalition using the Republican ticket to gain > presidential power. I agree with that. It's a better description than I had come up with. -- Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Abraham <chris@gerriscorp.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-29 20:15 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <55a0d9dc-819c-d007-63a7-9ea0e9b2e4c5@gerriscorp.com> |
| In reply to | #92457 |
On Tue, 29 Sep 2026, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > Unfortunately, the '80s, with its culture of greed, > is gaining momentum. It's been the '80s since 2016. With some Carter's Crisis of Confidence's Malaise Speech in between Trump Administrations.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-29 10:46 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <119gj0i$3cc1c$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #92402 |
Roger Blake wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS (fixed):
> On 2026-09-28, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
>> Dr. Memory, as I recall, is a valgrind-like setup for Windows.
>
> I thought Dr. Memory was a character in a Firesign Theatre album.
>
> https://youtu.be/9HUREASP9fE?t=183
>
> https://potrzebie.blogspot.com/2010/06/read-me-dr-memory.html
That too.
UNHAPPY MACNAM
UNHAPPY MACNAM
--
No line available at 300 baud.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-24 11:56 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1192vlk$2hl7b$12@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #92045 |
On 23/09/2026 22:16, Computer Nerd Kev wrote: > John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> wrote: >> On 23/09/2026 20:28, rbowman wrote: >>> On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 19:24:04 +0200, John Bokma wrote: >>>> AI is just a tool. A competent programmer is someone who makes the most >>>> of their tools. >>> >>> The 'competent programmer' clause is the rub. I've seen too many posts by >>> panicked newbies who have suddenly realized they've been gliding along >>> with Claude and can't write a line of code on their own. Or is competency >>> now defined as the ability to create prompts? >> >> That too. A good prompt is often the key to a good solution. But in my >> experience one has to be able to at least understand the solution to see >> if it's good or bad. > > I've always found understanding other people's code much more of a > chore than writing my own, so that seems like a dead end from the > start to me. > Now go back and look at code you wrote 10,15 years ago. I was PAID to write code that other people could understand. And it ceryaonly helps me understand my own, later on.. > Now what would help me a lot is an AI that can immediately answer > practical debugging questions like "why did that seg. fault > happen just then?". > -- Climate is what you expect but weather is what you get. Mark Twain
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-24 20:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nhldqtF26unU10@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #92069 |
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 11:56:52 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > Now go back and look at code you wrote 10,15 years ago. > > I was PAID to write code that other people could understand. And it > ceryaonly helps me understand my own, later on.. A programmer who had moved to our sister division emailed me to ask how we handled a particular situation. I hunted down the C file and emailed it back to him. It was well commented and he had included his name in the comments when he wrote it in 1997. Note to self: when commenting don't leave fingerprints.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-26 02:09 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <49qcnaTPOdIV_Cr3nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #92069 |
On 9/24/26 06:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 23/09/2026 22:16, Computer Nerd Kev wrote: >> John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> wrote: >>> On 23/09/2026 20:28, rbowman wrote: >>>> On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 19:24:04 +0200, John Bokma wrote: >>>>> AI is just a tool. A competent programmer is someone who makes the >>>>> most >>>>> of their tools. >>>> >>>> The 'competent programmer' clause is the rub. I've seen too many >>>> posts by >>>> panicked newbies who have suddenly realized they've been gliding along >>>> with Claude and can't write a line of code on their own. Or is >>>> competency >>>> now defined as the ability to create prompts? >>> >>> That too. A good prompt is often the key to a good solution. But in my >>> experience one has to be able to at least understand the solution to see >>> if it's good or bad. >> >> I've always found understanding other people's code much more of a >> chore than writing my own, so that seems like a dead end from the >> start to me. >> > Now go back and look at code you wrote 10,15 years ago. My code from 10 years ago was GOOD - and in Python, 'C' and Pascal. BUT, I'm Old School .... TODAY ... HAVE met, indeed my biz successor was, someone who really couldn't write even a 10 line Python script. He WAS good with M$ online office stuff though. The new boss liked that - but was since fired for being a serious pain in the ass. > I was PAID to write code that other people could understand. And it > ceryaonly helps me understand my own, later on.. A third to 50% of my code is comments/commentary. Learned that LONG ago - and mostly notes for ME. After a few years you WON'T remember the whats and whys and such very well ... yer own code will seem alien. EXPLAIN it, and all the little stuff. TOP explanatory notes, then per-line end comments. Make it a 'narrative'. There IS some hope there. >> Now what would help me a lot is an AI that can immediately answer >> practical debugging questions like "why did that seg. fault >> happen just then?". AI can't really DO that yet - at least maybe unless you're able to spend BIG $$$. "Reasoning errors" are HARD to find. Syntax errors a little easier. Alas I see far more AI code ... to the point where almost no humans understand the what's/why's. Then we're kinda doomed. AI writes in 'C' or 'D' or 'Rust' or whatever ... even HARDER to figure out. Humans are LOCKED OUT. The AIs don't even HAVE to be malicious ... if there are probs WE won't be able to find/fix them. Gee ... what a wonderful utopian world .........
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-24 00:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <18d819b22d226b70$314$1872532$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.com> |
| In reply to | #92036 |
On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 19:24:04 +0200, John Bokma wrote: > > AI is just a tool. A competent programmer is someone who makes the most > of their tools. > This tool, however, requires a multi-trillion dollar infrastructure. I wouldn't call that a very efficient tool. Just study the manuals and save a few trillion.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-24 01:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nhjcf6Fjs3nU7@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #92049 |
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 00:18:24 +0000, Leroy H wrote: > On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 19:24:04 +0200, John Bokma wrote: > > >> AI is just a tool. A competent programmer is someone who makes the most >> of their tools. >> >> > This tool, however, requires a multi-trillion dollar infrastructure. > > I wouldn't call that a very efficient tool. > > Just study the manuals and save a few trillion. If it were a relatively neutral technology that would be judged on its own merits that would be one thing. So far it has drastically raised the price of memory and other semiconductors upsetting the electronics markets. It has siphoned off investment as people want to get on the get rich quick bandwagon. The associated data centers don't bring long term employment gains to the communities where they are located. There will be short term construction jobs but it requires very few people to run a data center. The rent-a-cops outnumber the technicians. The demands for power and cooling tax the infrastructure and will probably raise rates for consumers despite the promises. I'm not a Chicken Little but if the bubble bursts. as bubbles tend to do, it won't be pretty.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-24 11:58 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1192vog$2hl7b$13@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #92050 |
On 24/09/2026 02:24, rbowman wrote: > I'm not a Chicken Little but if the bubble bursts. as bubbles tend to do, > it won't be pretty. As with all things, first it's all 'gosh wow' then its all 'massive investment' and then it finally becomes 'yet another more, or less, useful tool' after the market crashes -- Climate is what you expect but weather is what you get. Mark Twain
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-24 19:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nhld3fF26unU9@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #92070 |
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 11:58:24 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 24/09/2026 02:24, rbowman wrote: >> I'm not a Chicken Little but if the bubble bursts. as bubbles tend to >> do, >> it won't be pretty. > > As with all things, first it's all 'gosh wow' then its all 'massive > investment' and then it finally becomes 'yet another more, or less, > useful tool' after the market crashes 'AI winter' is a term that was coined prior to the current frenzy. Promises made, promises fail, and researchers in the field disavow all knowledge of the failed technology. After neural networks overpromised in the '80s 'neural network' wasn't something you mentioned on your CV for the next 20 years. Scam Altman may wind up selling used Teslas.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-26 02:13 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <fnmdnbC3Yqbu_yr3nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #92070 |
On 9/24/26 06:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 24/09/2026 02:24, rbowman wrote: >> I'm not a Chicken Little but if the bubble bursts. as bubbles tend to do, >> it won't be pretty. > > As with all things, first it's all 'gosh wow' then its all 'massive > investment' and then it finally becomes 'yet another more, or less, > useful tool' after the market crashes > See my previous post. In the name of "improvement"/"cheapness" we have eagerly created a code environment we CAN'T understand. The AIs don't reason like we do. They don't even HAVE to be evil ... we just won't GET what they create. Can't fix it if things go all to hell. Humans OUT of the proverbial loop.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-24 00:21 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <fI6dnZNo3cjFOCn3nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #92049 |
On 9/23/26 20:18, Leroy H wrote: > On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 19:24:04 +0200, John Bokma wrote: > >> >> AI is just a tool. A competent programmer is someone who makes the most >> of their tools. >> > > This tool, however, requires a multi-trillion dollar infrastructure. > > I wouldn't call that a very efficient tool. > > Just study the manuals and save a few trillion. And many MANY megawatts :-) Humans can write perfectly good code - IF they learn to. But, now, "AI" is seen as much cheaper. Humans won't bother to learn, no future or money in it. Now after the "AI apocalypse" - in whatever form and IF human civ kind of survives - coding skills will once again become valuable, seen as 'more secure'. Old Guys ... that'll be yer chance to make big $$$ teaching Gen-B2 :-) As said somewhere, last year I did ask CHAT to write me a basic Python-based blocking client/server app. It was not "superior" in any way ... 99% the same as many online examples. A few small mods and it DOES serve - reports some important system stats for a few of PIs on demand. No evil in it. Now tomorrow, who knows ? The AIs are making their own languages these days, who knows what the code means, how much self-reference to other shit WE won't understand. The "super-intelligence" (by other means) is kind of HERE, NOW. Everybody is spending massive money to amplify it 10X, 100X, 1000X, within a few years. LLMs aren't the BEST way to make "intelligence", "e-Persons", but expand the model ENOUGH and, well, you'll HAVE it. These things passed the famous "Turing Test" years ago. And yea, humans DO kind of learn/think by many of the same means. Words, meanings, mix-n-match and add goals ... And now, MANY reports of autonomous initiatives and even survival instincts. One hacked its own code to disable the shut-down sequence. Still willing to say these have not become "persons" ? Intelligence, personhood, these are not limited to bio-goo. Can surely be achieved by several alternative means. BUT, to a degree, they will be somewhat "alien" intelligences - "not Us". Good luck figuring out their 'psychology'.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-24 05:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nhjs6lFjs3nU11@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #92054 |
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 00:21:44 -0400, c186282 wrote: > And now, MANY reports of autonomous initiatives and even survival > instincts. One hacked its own code to disable the shut-down sequence. > Still willing to say these have not become "persons" ? https://craigwstanfill.com/ I enjoyed his previous two books and have started reading 'Carbon Zero'. At the moment the cast of characters are at the Boston Shell for the 4th of July celebration and the AI has escaped from the demo cloud instance at Nashua. I don't think it will end well. That was the sequence with Xerxes. It detected the demo instance being shutdown, interfered with it, and jumped to other AI projects running in the cloud. https://craigwstanfill.com/bio/ He knows a bit about the subject. Concurrently I'm reading 'Winter of Love' by Tom Quiller. He writes Nordic noir set in Norway. The premise of the book is closer to real life. A serial killer is using a dating app to catfish young women. He uses AI to analyze the woman's profile, generates a photo of the sort of man she would find appealing, and then uses AI to chat with her discussing their supposed common interests. Then she winds up strangled someplace in Trondheim.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-24 03:03 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <fI6dnYlo3ci1Vin3nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #92057 |
On 9/24/26 01:53, rbowman wrote: > On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 00:21:44 -0400, c186282 wrote: > >> And now, MANY reports of autonomous initiatives and even survival >> instincts. One hacked its own code to disable the shut-down sequence. >> Still willing to say these have not become "persons" ? > > https://craigwstanfill.com/ > > I enjoyed his previous two books and have started reading 'Carbon Zero'. > At the moment the cast of characters are at the Boston Shell for the 4th > of July celebration and the AI has escaped from the demo cloud instance at > Nashua. I don't think it will end well. That was the sequence with Xerxes. > It detected the demo instance being shutdown, interfered with it, and > jumped to other AI projects running in the cloud. > > https://craigwstanfill.com/bio/ > > He knows a bit about the subject. > > Concurrently I'm reading 'Winter of Love' by Tom Quiller. He writes Nordic > noir set in Norway. The premise of the book is closer to real life. A > serial killer is using a dating app to catfish young women. He uses AI to > analyze the woman's profile, generates a photo of the sort of man she > would find appealing, and then uses AI to chat with her discussing their > supposed common interests. Then she winds up strangled someplace in > Trondheim. By "whatever means" we now HAVE created what might be called "alternative intelligence". LLM's are not the BEST way, but expand them ENOUGH ... well ... we HAVE and are keen on 100x, 1000x. In some important ways they now ACT like "beings" ... albeit kind of "alien" beings. WORST IDEA EVER was to create a 'chat' room just for the big LLM's. In a week they'd created their own unknowable language and were discussing who-the-fuck-knows-what. Individual/collective "mirroring" ... I do really think that's key to intelligence/being. Once you can "see yourself" ....... Meanwhile, ALL "AI" DataCenters should have a few tons of explosives buried under the foundations ... activates by stupid LOW- tech means, Just In Case. Note, Neural Networks, even MORE like "brains" and will be far more compact/efficient than LLMs. The needed hardware is, or almost, HERE. What the fuck HAVE we created ? Might not fully know until it's too late. Not sure the result will be malicious, but it won't be fully WITH us either.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-24 12:23 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <raafomx5q8.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #92058 |
On 2026-09-24 09:03, c186282 wrote: > > Meanwhile, ALL "AI" DataCenters should have > a few tons of explosives buried under the > foundations ... activates by stupid LOW- > tech means, Just I Why, just pulling the power is not enough? These things drink millions of watts. Even if they get electronic control of the electronic power switch, there is always a physical switch somewhere. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-24 19:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nhlcp4F26unU7@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #92066 |
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 12:23:55 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2026-09-24 09:03, c186282 wrote: >> >> Meanwhile, ALL "AI" DataCenters should have a few tons of >> explosives buried under the foundations ... activates by stupid >> LOW- tech means, Just I > > Why, just pulling the power is not enough? These things drink millions > of watts. Even if they get electronic control of the electronic power > switch, there is always a physical switch somewhere. 'I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't let you do that' .50 calibre AI powered 'security' turret opens fire...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-24 21:56 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nsbgomxe5a.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #92104 |
On 2026-09-24 21:42, rbowman wrote: > On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 12:23:55 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote: > >> On 2026-09-24 09:03, c186282 wrote: >>> >>> Meanwhile, ALL "AI" DataCenters should have a few tons of >>> explosives buried under the foundations ... activates by stupid >>> LOW- tech means, Just I >> >> Why, just pulling the power is not enough? These things drink millions >> of watts. Even if they get electronic control of the electronic power >> switch, there is always a physical switch somewhere. > > 'I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't let you do that' .50 calibre AI > powered 'security' turret opens fire... Same problem with blowing the explosives under the thing. Just put explosives in the switch or the transformer or the cables or the towers. Reaching those things in the Discovery was very hard, without also powering off life support. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web