mcv

It's certainly the option I'm rooting for, but it would still be a massive drama and disrupt a lot of lives. Which is why they'll probably get bailed out with taxpayer money.

It is great for boilerplate code. It can also explain code for you, or help with an unfamiliar library. It's even helped me be productive when my brain wasn't ready to really engage with the code.

But here's the real danger: because I've got AI to do it for me, my brain doesn't have to engage fully with the code anymore. I don't really get into the flow where code just flows out of your hands like I used to. It's becoming a barrier between me and the real magic of coding. And that sucks, because that's what I love about this work. Instead, I'm becoming the AI's manager. I never asked for that.

They might. The amount of money they're pumping into this is absolutely staggering. I don't see how they're going to make all of that money back, unless they manage to replace nearly all employees.

Either way it's going to be a disaster: mass unemployment or the largest companies in the world collapsing.

This is the real thing. You can absolutely get good code out of AI, but it requires a lot of hand holding. It helps me speed some tasks, especially boring ones, but I don't see it ever replacing me. It makes far too many errors, and requires me to point them out, and to point in the direction of the solution.

They are great at churning out massive amounts of code. They're also great at completely missing the point. And the massive amount of code needs to be checked and reviewed. Personally I'd rather write the code and have the AI review it. That's a much more pleasant way to work, and that way it actually enhances quality.

You mean why everybody is suddenly flocking to DDR4 and AM4 CPUs? They might actually be new systems. If you need a new system, with the current prices you're pretty much screwed. I don't blame people for looking for creative solutions, but I'm really glad I buy my PCs a bit oversized so they will last me a long time. I can afford to ignore PC prices for a couple of years.

What does ram use have to do with it? We're talking about the CPU.

And as parent of a son in an exam year, I see a lot of value in him downgrading his PC.

Specifically, it's propped up by the growth of wealth inequality. Money is going less to poor people who need it for food and rent, and more to rich people who gamble on speculative bubbles. As long as they can afford to pump more money in, the bubble can continue.

The games I've got aren't going away. But new games should maybe stop aiming for the highest specs.

My son, who has a 5800x3d, complained last week about skyrocketing ram prices, just when he wanted to buy some extra ram. I told him that's mostly ddr5 ram and he needs ddr4 which is less affected. Apparently that's not true anymore.

Edit: now he's considering if he just wants to sell it and go without gaming for a while.

Turns out he only has the 5700x3d, although that's still worth more than he paid for that plus his GPU.

Because they hold power and you don't. And they think they can get away with abusing their power. It's up to us to show them they can't.

This is not a car, it's a truck, and should require a commercial license to drive.

There are much more reasonable cars for extremely tall people.