> but they're not even in the same universe as what the Stasi was doing
At what point? It's easy to say when we mention the Stasi or the Nazis that we're comparing it to the end game they had going, but the transformation was a bit of process.
> Textual command filtering is entirely useless. It is fit for no purpose. Nobody with any instinct or experience in security would even bother to implement this filter because it achieves nothing except a false sense of security.
Not if you only use an allow list. E.g. only allow things matching a particular prefix to run. Also, isn't this what every agent does? And by every I mean Codex because I haven't used the others.
Good to see Codex as a datapoint: I haven't used it. I can confirm though that this is certainly what Claude does, with the addition that Claude's adherence to its own string-match based allowlist seems even less deterministic than OpenCode's.
> Even if your average developer is a measly 30% more efficient, that might create 20% less demand for developers
I mean it might. But I wouldn't rule out Jevon's paradox where the increased efficiency increases demand.
Build more roads, congestion gets worse. Make developers more efficient, demand for developers increases. I wouldn't be surprised if demand for bespoke software goes up.
I see it go in either two directions, assuming it plateaus at a marginal increase in productivity. Either this newly found productivity helps teams tackle backlog tasks that they never had the time to complete, or it's used to churn out more low quality work.
And I would say in its case, there was great synergy between not doing anything and appearing uninvited. Two negatives combining to produce an overwhelmingly greater negative.
About six months ago I had an idea for a short story in which an LLM takes over the world and is decidedly bad. The solution was going to be for everybody to write positive stories in which the LLM is good and relinquishes control, which then made it's way into the LLM's training data and it backed off. I never got around to it.
> The solution was going to be for everybody to write positive stories in which the LLM is good and relinquishes control, which then made it's way into the LLM's training data
AI Coding "All the things" (tm). More agent engineering on the bigger stuff and more vibe coding on the smaller things.
A print farm manager for bambu printers in lan mode. I lay down the base types and schema structure and a few other bits here and there.
Using AI to preprocess some amazon transactions from both personal account and business accounts as I untangle them since I started a side business with my spouse a few months ago (involving 3d printing).
Starting on a yoga workout generator and food/fitness/weight tracker.
> And yet, people are being more productive (actually productive) with AI. Release schedules are increasing, bugs are getting fixed faster, security issues identified and patched sooner, so on and so forth.
I didn't see anything in parent chain that implied this. Nor did I see it "characterized as a magic eraser"; I saw it framed as something that impedes learning, and that was tied back to constant simulation.
> Or at least, aware that this argument continues to be made with tenuous evidence and anecdotes
The arguments I read and the argument you seem to be replying to seem to be different things.
I read it more as response to your argument that it was a lack of curiosity due to over stimulation, which they responded to by citing an example of a time when they were curious while stimulated and chucked something at a vibe-coding agent to satisfy that curiosity.
Yep, now I have the time to satisfy my curiosity in weird things because it doesn't take active time from me that much.
Before all those curiosity brain farts would've just slipped away with "oh well, I'll never have the time to find out".
Wikipedia has scratched the same itch multiple times, but from a different angle. Doing deep dives in weird stuff is so much easier with Wikipedia than it used to be when you had to go to the library and pull books from the shelves for an hour or two.
> relatively little friction if you decide to move to a state that better reflects them.
Yes, moving is possible, and easier than switching countries. But the biggest strength of the U.S. is not that people can move, but that the blast radius is contained. The strength is being able to think later "I'm glad we didn't try that everywhere at once." The strength is being able to experiment, not necessarily have states aligned to with all there residents needs within a certain threshold.
At what point? It's easy to say when we mention the Stasi or the Nazis that we're comparing it to the end game they had going, but the transformation was a bit of process.