This is not "enshittification". That implies it's gotten worse over time. Smart TVs have been doing this from the beginning.

I disagree. It's definitely gotten worse, notification ads for my TV for example.

LG also didn't used to have home screen ads, but that's a long time ago now.

Smart TVs are the enshittification of regular TVs. An attempt to extract more money from the customer without providing a useful benefit.

Search's AI mode is by far the most popular "AI app". Most of the time I don't end up using Gemini, it's because search's AI mode is good enough for my needs and I use it out of habit. I imagine a lot of other would-be Gemini users are in similar shoes.

Google doesn't care if you use Gemini or Google search. But they are so so happy if the ai results in search are "good enough" that you don't need to go use a "frontier llm"

Google search related ad revenue is still going up. Volume isn't everything. Personally, as llms have gotten better I do more and more product research on Google.

Ads are meaningless without a surface to show them on. Search is absolutely a core product.

Those rewrites happen because someone was interested in making them happen (often the maintainer). The meme is that evangelists will constantly advocate to you that your project should be rewritten.

I hardly see a difference, that is how evangelism works.

It can also be exhausting. Extended travel makes me very tired. And I generally like talking to people.

The word "travel" comes from "travail", or "to toil, work strenuously, or suffer".

But I'd still rather be travelling and seeing the world than being nervous about my job being cut due to AI.

"I'd rather be a millionaire and never have to work than be worried about my job being cut due to AI"

Maybe not a million, although having a few million, even just in a bank account earning moderate interest (4.5% PA) is easily enough to retire forever.

That's quite the moving goalpost.

Why do you feel the need to simplify life into such a narrow perspective? While it's true that being smart can limit your confidence, what you've written is beyond exaggeration. There is so much more complexity involved.

There is some insight to his post. If you're very intelligent, there are many points in your life that steer you away from starting your own company. If at any point the best option you have is to start a company, you were probably not a very good student or employee.

This is largely my experience as well. The Bay Area wannabe startup crowd is brimming with idiots, people dumber than your dumbest colleague at work. Unbelievable amounts of Dunning-Kruger.

The actual grind filters out most of them, of course, but if you concede that some businesses are basically luck then some number of those idiots will make it.

I agree that intelligent people often get railroaded into a certain kind of life, but I think the prognosis is still a little off. It's clear in the US that owning a successful company has some of the highest outcomes possible in society (if financial freedom is the goal).

People who don't have those types of things in mind can only be so smart in my book.

"Successful" is the key. A winning lottery ticket is one of the quickest ways to get money, the hard part is the "winning". If you are smart, there are many career paths that are highly likely to be very profitable, with small risk of failure and a pretty high floor. That is not the case for starting a business. The upside is potentially much higher, but it is much less likely, and the downside is huge.

Having access to capital is much more important than smarts, which is why so many people starting businesses have generational money propping them up, or as a safety net. Even smart people are usually reliant on that family capital. Bill Gates’ parents were millionaires, Musk and his dad’s emerald mine, Thiel started his first hedge fund with a million dollars raised from “friends and family”.

It had uptime issues before Microsoft. They just got better at tracking and reporting after Microsoft.

So, before October, they were lousy at tracking downtime issues for 2 years (no downtime from 2016 to 2018), but in November, Microsoft came and gave them the technology to correctly track downtime, and they had their first downtime logged in November.

Is this your argument?

My subjective experience was that it got a lot worse post-Microsoft. I could be misremembering though!

If you have ever TL'd a team, it doesn't sound too crazy. I have 8 folks I generally talk to very consistently throughout the day. If I'm not in 1:1s with them I'm usually reviewing their changes or chatting with them over chat. I don't think I can do all of that and work with a bunch of AI windows, but I do think they could likely do something similar to me with several agents running in parallel.

Your team members can be held "accountable" of the code they write: they can explain it, defend it in a PR, take ownership of it.

Your LLM has forgotten whatever shit it wrote when you opened a new tab, and that responsibility is now on you. And it wrote absolute dog shit

Try antigravity. I think it generally has the right level of comments.