@Beefshaver

pspsps.bsky

 Vancouver
Joined March 2011
  • Tweets20.1K
  • Following715
  • Followers1.6K
1.6KMedia
I don't get why so many on the left and the right point to ideology being at the heart of the BC results, when the evidence points to "BC NDP made a cynical election call and NDP voters stayed home" as the real factor.
Cheri DiNovo
@CheriDiNovoOct 25
A warning to all of the NDP - if you govern from the centre and not as Democratic Socialists - you risk this. The Bob Rae curse.
52
53
11
417
14,856
So my initial thoughts about Doerkson's post-victory scrum is he's going to struggle pretty hard to bring a Harper-like control to a caucus full of first-timers and culture warriors. But if I know anything about conservatives, they love a secret whipping.
1
1
26
1,022
Bringing in a Clark-era transition manager and then likely Chief of Staff is a pretty good signal that he does intend to try to keep the culture war stuff in check or at least just bubbling under the surface. But he's going to have to throw red meat now and again.
1
2
130
His answer on the Massey tunnel says a lot. He says they should keep working on it, but that it won't work in its current form and also he wants a bridge. He sais he's committed quite a lot while not actually committing to anything.
2
125
Fewer people voted for the Conservatives than last election, and this city just elected it's most left wing municipal government ever. I think taking that as pro-Conservatism is an interesting angle.
Angelo Isidorou
@angeloisidorouOct 25
It is a triumph that a Conservative Party dominated a city, including downtown cores, while not capitulating on really any policy. It goes to show that voters are very open to Conservatism. In fact, we are just shy of winning the majority popular vote. Tone, tone, tone!
8
7
95
2,283
"Publicly accessible healthcare" is not the same as public healthcare.
Jarryd Jäger
@JarrydJaeger22h
On Election Night, BC Greens leader Emily Lowan said she was "scared" that a BC Conservative majority would cut public services and put vulnerable people at risk. I asked Premier-elect Lorne Doerkson to respond to her claim👇
4
16
84
996
The debate over core responsibilities assumed a reasonable provincial government, but you're about to see the importance of a city stepping up to provide when the province wants to cut.
1
2
12
448
The city needs to cement some very fundamental things in local law and culture quickly because the axe man is coming.
2
57
Exciting to see a fumble this bad in my lifetime.
1
2
11
507
Counterpoint: as we come to expect less quality and personal touch, every potential client will expect they can do the work themselves and not even know or care what a software engineer is. This is what we are currently seeing.
John Crickett
@johncrickettOct 23
My prediction for software engineering over the next 3 to 5 years. AI won't replace software engineers. It'll drive even greater demand for them. A team of 5 experienced engineers using AI will outperform a team of 20 pre-AI. Which will dramatically reduce the cost of building software. I think we'll see Jevons paradox in action. As something becomes cheaper and more efficient to produce, demand for it can increase dramatically. Thousands of software projects that previously weren't economically viable will become worth doing. The winners will be companies, big and small, that behave like Google, Amazon and 3M, with a culture of experimentation, a willingness to try lots of ideas and the discipline to kill their darlings. TL/DR: Smaller engineering teams, more innovation, more software products, and potentially more software engineers than ever. What do you think?
1
1
184
There is no pipeline to enforce the need for standards at this point. There is no pipeline to teach juniors what they need to know to move up the chain. We have management actively changing expectations to satisfy a lack of expertise and the AI replacement for that.
62
They don't even guess the most accurate thing. They guess the most "likely" thing. That's incredibly important.
Adrian@SillyPutty78Oct 23
So pissed we've allowed LLM's to be called AI . LLM's are not intelligent. They cannot reason like a human. If programmed well they can guess the next, most accurate thing to output after any previous output based on programmed criteria, but it doesn't "know" a goddamn thing.
1
7
186
Well no, the problem is that things we create need to be reproducible in order to confirm they do what we think they do and understand them. The published reproducibility crisis was such a harbinger of this crisis.
Matti Palli
@tritloOct 23
Replying to @tritlo
at some point we have to realize that the problem is not the language, it's the fact that we have no idea what we want
1
5
238
If we can no longer reproduce results and understand those results, we cannot know what we've done. Science at that point is dead. And to pass that along to a machine that produces based on what we produce is so so bad.
32
Wealth doesn't do anything by its nature. Sitting on value doesn't produce anything, siphoning it out of the working economy hurts people. If you're interested in creating things, a wealth tax is a good idea.
stephanie allen@builtjusticeOct 23
A former private sector developer colleague of mine loves BC Greens’ wealth tax idea. Make of that what you will.
1
4
19
846
The economy should be made up of people producing things and buying things. The fact there's a cheat code where somebody who doesn't produce anything gets to gain wealth specifically because they withhold the potential to produce or buy things is an obvious error.
1
1
2
113
Most engineers did what the my were paid to do. I don't know why this part is skipped so hard.
render
@infinterendersOct 23
we’re about to discover that 20 years of software engineering was largely an exercise in accidental complexity, architectural overfitting, and institutionalized mediocrity. most developers optimized for shipping code, not understanding computation.
1
106
The economy doesn't pay for perfect code in every circumstance. Our systems are strictly about doing what is good enough with what we're willing to pay. We're in a rage moment where the market will pay an unlimited amount to recombine every piece of code that ever existed.
Anant Jain
@anantjainOct 23
If AI had been writing and reviewing its own code for the past few decades, and humans had only recently started looking into what it was up to and discovered an ever-growing list of CVEs, we would reasonably conclude that AI hadn’t been good at coding all along and that we should just start over. Except it’s the other way around. Humans have been the ones writing and reviewing each other’s code for decades. Very diligently, if I may add. If we’re being intellectually honest and holding ourselves to the same bar we hold AI to, we’d have to admit that we haven’t been all that good at it either.
1
103
I'm going to bring this back to the risk of AI being a singularity that nobody can understand or control changing things so quickly that we can't adapt to it. This is with what is essentially a research tool, imagine what a self-driven machine intelligence could do.
calle
@callebtcOct 22
I'm tired boss
1
1
5
268
And again LLMs are not intelligent. But man oh man are they a great vector for any type of intelligence to create change human being have no capacity to mitigate at a rate that's basically unthinkable.
1
48
Load more