How does outsourcing reduce the need for a developer? The developer is still there, his paycheck is just being signed by someone else. How many people like that are they going to need, and will business analysts be qualified to do some of the work? Do they really need a CS grad? The number of coders, people who understand complex code and software, needed will reduce by a lot --- and it will accelerate as management starts to realize this. The effect is already happening. There are 20% less employed software developers in the US today than in 2019 (measured by ADP .. who processes most US paychecks). See this graph: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fflo.uri.sh%2Fvisualisati... That's a big deal.

For good reason. I know people who, with zero coding knowledge .. like they can't print "hello world" let alone tell you what a for loop is, 100% vibe coded fully functional (has all the features they wanted it to have -- including a backend API on GCP/AWS) apps/games that are on the App Store (they aren't selling well, but that's due to marketing .. the features are fully implemented).

All they had is a little determination, a week or two to focus on it, and a few basics on prompting such as asking the AI the best way to do things.

AI walked them through every step, cloud sign up, domain name purchase and DNS, creating the graphics in a consistent style, listing the needed features they might be missing, and including setting up the developer account and all that. And that's in 2025/2026.

Presumably in 2027 an agent would do all that.

And no, masses of coders won't be needed to architect or maintain enterprise applications with existing codebases either.

The concept/idea is great, but I am like 90% sure they will F it up with bad writing and production. The trailers weren't great.

Or Roadrunner?

They want regulation to block competitors. Regulation makes startup investors quest, for good reason -- as it can easily prevent a business from succeeding.

They couldn't stop playing that song incessantly on MTV in the early (or mid?) nineties. It got to the point I really was wishing for a black hole sun to come.

sits alongside .. Typescript? That's like saying I live on planet Earth, the same planet home to Einstein, Isaac Newton, and Kim Kardashian -- therefore I must be on par with Einstein.

You know every extinct species that existed before us, from the dodo-bird to the tyrannosaurus .. they all were wiped out by some catastrophic event such as a meteor or some other more capable and adapted species outcompeting them. Humans on the other hand, will be discovered by some future actual-intelligent species .. likely some descendent of cockroaches, if not an alien race, as the one species in the entire galaxy who self-annihilated themselves -- and that too over stupid shit. The only thing that might prevent the nature of our demise being the laughingstock is that it would be considered too far fetched and ridiculous to be true.

Many years back (early 2000s) I dated a gal who lived on Treasure Island (which is in the SF Bay Area). I was like "say, this place is nice ..and the location is convenient.. why don't more people live here?". Then I got to explore the island a bit.

They want to squish competition. They don't want you running models locally. That's all the is. Classic play when a company gets big they start asking government to put in regulations so that small players have to go through mountains of paperwork and make their investors afraid due to all the uncertainty. How do you think the pharmaceuticals ground innovation to a halt by using the FDA as a battering ram? It costs $2 billion to do a clinical trial in the US .. nobody's going to invest that much on any crazy ideas. The EPA does the same. It's all a racket.

VR is guaranteed flop unless they can make a headset under 100 grams, 4K per eye, and 120 fps. If it can't be done, VR can't be done. If the laws of physics prevent it, the laws of physics prevent VR. Even Meta's future headset, Phoenix, may flop because although it is (supposedly) 75 grams it will likely be a mere 2.5K and only achieve 90 fps. Of course when it fails they will claim the VR concept itself isn't wanted by consumers rather than blame their stupid implementation. Don't even attempt to make a VR headset if your concept can't do a minimum of 4K per eye (ideally 8K per eye @ 120 degree FoV) and 100 grams (ideally 50 or less -- normal sunglasses weigh 20 grams) and 120 fps.

I've had one for some time, but literally NOBODY believes how well it works .. not until a test drive or two. I'm surprised a bunch of idiots didn't reply you saying "omg, its not really driving itself .. you're supervising it" ..or that you're intervening but your brain deletes it from your memory. Slashdot luddites in particular are adamant that cars can never drive themselves -- there are too many "variables".

This unionization was probably sponsored and paid for by Waymo and Tesla since this will accelerate Uber and Lyft moving to robotaxis. Congratulations!

So? One can change.

They are calling for regulation because they want to protect their own monopoly and block new entrants. They must fear the open models or something. We know the pharmaceuticals played the same game such that it's impossible for a startup to develop and bring to market a new drug without the "help" of a giant existing player. In the case of pharmaceuticals the $2 billion per approval price tag virtually guarantees no paradigm shifting ideas will receive funding due to fear of it failing in late stage clinical trial.

Established AI companies want to block open, domain specific, or models created via distillation from joining the party. They want to be sure no more AI companies can emerge, the only way to make certain of that is with a mountain of government regulation and uncertainty.