Spitting out code as fast as our fingers could type has never been the job. There has always been a lot of think time.

Which is why the productivity of people of people has never been correlated with typing speed.

In other jobs productivity is correlated with typing speed and in those jobs a typing speed like 60wpm is part of the job requirements.

What I remember hearing is that exercises and practice are needed to transform words on the page to something you know and master.

What I remember being questioned is does it make sense to do those exercises as homework or would they be better in school.

Or on the flip side should school get out early like 11 or noon, like I think the german gymnasium does and have all the exercises as homework.

The US system where children get out of school at 15:30 and still have a bunch of homework seems a little lopsided someplace.

The 3 month break in-between school years is definitely questionable.

I think the answer is a complex one because it intersects with personality and neurodivergence.

Depending on who you are and your family situation any form of homework can be a real challenge. Not because of what you are studying but because of how difficult it is to sit down and do anything you aren't passionate about. Certainly anyone with an executive function disability will have that challenge.

Part of the problem is AI datacenters make bad neighbors. Because they are in such a rush to become operational they cut corners.

Instead of AC they use swamp coolers draining aquifers and thus wells of the neighbors.

Instead of using new power plants (AKA using renewables as most new plants do, and all old datacenters did). They either hook up to the grid and jack up everyones electric prices or use generators because they can't be bothered to wait for a grid connection.

All of which is to say while on the grand scale they may be fine. Locally they can be unpleasant to have in your back yard.

If the LLM datacenter builders and operators weren't cutting corners and rushing and doing everything they can to be good neighbors. There would be much less push back.

I say this as someone with 2 huge pre-AI datacenters in my town that have been fine.

> They either hook up to the grid and jack up everyones electric prices or use generators because they can't be bothered to wait for a grid connection.

Got source for that? Because in 90%+ of cases the power prices dropped because they are baseload.

I am a native speaker and that is how I read it as well.

I started before the guide was published. I am 40 years in on challenging myself and learning and improving and there remains so much more I have the opportunity to master.

I myself am spending a lot of time leveling up, I recently realized there are so many things about programming and CS that I don't know about or only have a superficial knowledge. There's so much to learn but it's very rewarding.

Lyf short

I would change

"Codex starts encrypting prompts, uses ciphertext for inference instead"

to just

"Codex starts encrypting prompts"

That is enough.

Maybe you could say sub agent prompts. The article can say the rest.

Not everything is encrypted though, session data (even from the sub-agent) remains unencrypted, only select things like the prompt the (main) agent sends the sub-agent is encrypted, rest of communication between the two seems still to be plain-text.

Regardless, I've updated the title from "Codex starts encrypting prompts, uses ciphertext for inference instead" to "Codex starts encrypting sub-agent prompts", hope this makes it clearer for everyone :)

I think a better summary is that google gave someone the responsibility to ensure AI was developed and used ethically, and didn't give them the power to execute that responsibility.

Apparently google did not even give them the freedom to come to their own conclusions.

I just skimmed through the paper again and what it says seems to hold up well.

The paper is heritical in that it suggests slowing down, using carefully chosen less biased data, and understanding how it all works.

Basically challenging the AI bitter lesson.

I can see how that would meet with a lot of resistance from people who have gone all in on the bitter lesson.

What?

That post says very clearly at the beginning that hybrids are the preferred approach right now.

No one except the NSA actually wants a non-hybrid.

Which raises the question what is the NSA up to.

Especially since the NSA has a mission statement, a track record, and a billion dollar budget to subvert other peoples cryptography. When they aren't beyond transparent why should anyone give them the benefit of the doubt?

California has another distortion. The property value for tax purposes does not change unless you sell.

In many other states there is the lesser distortion of property valuearions for tax purposes not being allowed to go up faster than a roughly fized rate. Something like 3% a year.

At a practical level I wonder if limiting how much rents can increase from year to year would be a better policy, than not letting rent levels change at all.

Then there is the question of how to encourage home construction so there is sufficient supply where there is demand for people to live.

Dijkstra actually had a much more reasonable title on the article.

It was the editor of the publication Niklaus Wirth that changed the title to goto considered harmful.

Dijkstra was arguing for procedures with a single entry point and a single exit point. So it is easier to reason about what a procedure does.