Unironically this. The fastest “web apps” I’ve seen that weren’t absolutely required to be javascript-heavy to operate by virtue of what they do, have been mostly or entirely rendered server-side and have just sent entire pages for most interactions. Still performed better than 99% of webapps.
Bribing foreign officials is illegal in the US. It prevents our country from becoming a haven and hot-spot for activity that harms the rule of law overseas and destabilizes foreign states, because we generally prefer that other countries not worry about that when setting their trade policies with us.
This is kinda true, even with a generous take on the CIA: they don’t want rogue freebooters screwing with their plans—why, you might destabilize a democracy they weren’t planning to replace with a dictatorship!
But also the trading reputation of a country is kinda a common good that individuals can profit by tarnishing, which makes it a prime target for very-valid and probably-a-good-idea regulation of that sort.
Yeah, to be fair, there exist employees (some of whom are managers) who could not be replaced and their absence would improve productivity. So the bar for “can this replace any employees at all?” is potentially so low that, technically, cat’ing from /dev/null can clear it, if you must have a computerized solution.
Companies won’t be able to figure those cases out, though, because if they could they’d already have gotten rid of those folks and replaced them with nothing.
Ah, different “action”, then? The presence of “reducer” had me assuming the action was also analogous.
FWIW I liked Redux enough that I once half-reimplemented it for Brightscript so the UI guys would have something familiar to work with when they had to touch Roku apps. I always taught Redux initially using different terminology, though, because I found that most of my time learning it (which, mercifully, still wasn’t that long, because it’s small and pretty sensible) was figuring out the vocabulary (“do… do they just mean ‘event’? Well if so surely they’d write ‘event’, so I must be wrong…”)
Hmm, that is a good point that `useActionState` accepts a reducer-like function (although I think it's async in this case?).
And yeah, half of Redux's terminology is simply because the existing Flux Architecture libraries from the prior year all used those terms. There were several debates in the issues about whether to name them "actions", "events", or something else, and the conclusion was "let's just stick with the existing Flux terminology":
Scams and other antisocial use cases are basically the only ones for which the damn things are actually the kind of productivity rocket-fuel people want them to be, so far.
We better hope that changes sharply, or these things will be a net-negative development.
Right? To me it's eerily similar to how cryptocurrency was sold as a general replacement for all money uses, but turned out to be mainly useful for societally negative things like scams and money laundering.
I’m watching some of this happening first and second hand, and have seen a lot of evidence of companies spending a ton of money on these, spinning up departments, buying companies, pivoting their entire company’s strategy to AI, et c, and zero of its meaningfully replacing employees. It takes very skilled people to use LLMs well, and the companies trying to turn 5 positions into 2 aren’t paying enough to reliably get and keep two people who are good at it.
I’ve seen it be a minor productivity boost, and not much more.
I mean, yes, that is in practice what I’m seeing so far. A lot of spending, and if they’re lucky productivity doesn’t drop. Best case I’ve seen so far is that it’s a useful tool that gives a small boost, but even for that a lot of folks are so bad at using them that it’s not helping.
The situation now is kinda like back when it was possible to be “good at Google” and lots of people, including in tech, weren’t. It’s possible to be good at LLMs, and not a lot of people are.
Yes. The people who can use these tools to dramatically increase their capabilities and output without a significant drop in quality were already great engineers for which there was more demand than supply. That isn't going to change soon.
Ditto for other use cases, like writer and editor. There are a ton of people doing that work whom I don’t think are ever going to figure out how to use LLMs well. Like, 90% of them. And LLMs are nowhere near making the rest so much better that they can make up for that.
They’re ok for Tom the Section Manager to hack together a department newsletter nobody reads, though, even if Tom is bad at using LLMs. They’re decent at things that don’t need to be any good because they didn’t need to exist in the first place, lol.
I disagree. By far, most of the code is created by perpetually replaced fresh juniors churning out garbage. Similarly, most of the writing is low-quality marketing copy churned out by low-paid people who may or may not have "marketing" in their job title.
Nah, if the last 10-20 years demonstrated something, it's that nothing needs to be any good, because a shitty simulacrum achieves almost the same effect but costs much less time and money to produce.
(Ironically, SOTA LLMs are already way better at writing than typical person writing stuff for money.)
> (Ironically, SOTA LLMs are already way better at writing than typical person writing stuff for money.)
I’m aware of multiple companies that would love to know about these, because they’re currently flailing around trying to replace writers with editors + LLMs and it’s not going great. The closest to success are the ones that are only aiming to turn out stuff one step better than outright book-spam, and even they aren’t quite where they want to be, hardly a productivity bump at all from the LLM use and increased demand on their few talented humans.
