Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Cognition founder Scott Wu says most software never gets built because the economics don't work: "The math only really works out to create software if it's going to be used at least a million times or something. Maybe it's 10,000 times or whatever." "You need that software to be...

37,919 görüntüleme • 29 gün önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

Is Traditional Software Engineering Dead? “Does this mean that traditional software engineering is dead? Absolutely not. Software engineers—even the ones who are not necessarily tuning or training AI models—these are now among the most leveraged people on earth. Sure, the guys who are training and tuning models are even more leveraged because they’re building the tool set that software engineers are using. But software engineers still have two massive advantages on you. First, they think in code, so they actually know what’s going on underneath. And all abstractions are leaky. So when you have a computer programming for you—when you have Claude Code or equivalent programming for you—it’s going to make mistakes. It’s going to have bugs. It’s going to have suboptimal architecture. So it’s not going to be quite right. And someone who understands what’s going on underneath will be able to plug the leaks as they occur. So if you want to build a well-architected application, if you want to be able to even specify a well-architected application, if you want to be able to make it run at high performance, if you want it to do its best, if you want to catch the bugs early, then you’re going to want to have a software engineering background. The traditional software engineer is going to be able to use these tools much better. And there are still many kinds of problems in software engineering that are out of scope for these AI programs today. The easiest way to think about those is problems that are outside of their data distribution. For example, if they need to do a binary sort or reverse a linked list, they’ve seen countless examples of that, so they’re extremely good at it. But when you start getting out of their domain—where you have to write very high-performance code, when you’re running on architectures that are novel or brand new, when you’re actually creating new things or solving new problems, then you still need to get in there and hand code it. At least until either there are so many of those examples that new models can be trained on them, or until these models can sufficiently reason at even higher levels of abstraction and crack it on their own… And remember: there is no demand for average. The average app—nobody wants it, at least as long as it’s not filling some niche that is filled by a superior app. The app that is better will win essentially a hundred percent of the market. Maybe there’s some small percentage that will bleed off to the second-best app because it does some little niche feature better than the main app, or it’s cheaper, or something of the sort. But generally speaking, people only want the best of anything. So the bad news is there’s no point in being number two or number three—like in the famous Glengarry Glen Ross scene where Alec Baldwin says, “First place gets a Cadillac Eldorado, second place gets a set of steak knives, and third place you’re fired.” That’s absolutely true in these winner-take-all markets. That’s the bad news: You have to be the best at something if you want to win. However, the set of things you can be best at is infinite. You can always find some niche that is perfect for you, and you can be the best at that thing. This goes back to an old tweet of mine where I said, “Become the best in the world at what you do. Keep redefining what you do until this is true.” And I think that still applies in this age of AI.”

Naval

852,675 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Elon Musk: I'll be long dead before we're really a multiplanet species. But at least I'd like to see us make great progress in this direction. “Why do these things? I think this is important for maximizing the probable lifespan of humanity or consciousness. Human civilization could come to an end for external reasons, like a giant meteor, or supervolcanoes, or extreme climate change. Or World War III, or, you know, any one of a number of reasons. But the probable lifespan of civilization and consciousness, as we know it, which we should really view as this very delicate thing, like a small candle in a vast darkness, that is what appears to be the case. We're in this vast darkness of space, and there's this little candle of consciousness that's only really come about after 4.5 billion years. And it could just go out. I think that's powerful, and I think a lot of people will be inspired by that vision. And so the reason you need the million people is because there has to be enough people there to do everything that you need to survive. The critical threshold is, if the ships from Earth stop coming for any reason, does the Mars city die out or not? We have to pass that. People talk about the great filters, the things that perhaps, you know, we talk about the Fermi paradox and where are the aliens, and, well, maybe there is various great filters that the aliens didn't pass, and so they eventually just cease to exist. And one of the great filters is becoming a multiplanet species. So we want to pass that filter. And I'll be long dead before this is a real thing, before it happens. But I'd like to at least see us make great progress in this direction.” Source: TED, April 6, 2022.

ELON CLIPS

33,404 görüntüleme • 18 gün önce