I’m no expert on image editing in general and even less so with AI image generation, but I’m pretty sure there’s some weirdness where the foreground of the boat interacts with the background of the water.

The railing (which dips in and out of view suggesting the ship is flexing in a way that may or may not be one of those “engineering is actually just absurd” things) seems to be overlapped by the background in a manner that looks plausibly like a compression artefact except for the way it moves:

You can also see that some of the specks in the glass (which are consistent from the video start) appear to get “lost” in the background and/or picked up and carried away by it. Particularly note the one in the top left that “flashes” as it passes a brighter area of the background, but the flash starts several frames before they actually overlap.

There are some other slop-ish but non-definitive aspects like this thingy and its wobbly outline:

But in general this is very convincing.

I should stop nerd sniping myself investigating these things.

Thanks for such a detailed response. I suppose asking you to essentially predict the future of this particular industry was a bit ambitious.

My immediate gut instinct is that we SHOULD still be teaching kids coding

As is mine, which for me I think, even if I take it as read that LLMs are the future of programming, comes from the same place that makes me think in spite of Python, programming courses should start with C. But it’s become pretty obvious to me that a lot of people don’t have that desire to “go under the hood”, and still seem to manage, so part of me thinks maybe the same will become true of LLM users.

these days I’m thinking we’re still at the beginning of an exponential curve

a lot of people are just assuming it’ll all blow over once the bubble pops, but like all the other bubbles, it’s formed because there is a very real technological leap happening, and it’s not going away

I’m one of the people you called out who “hasn’t used a paid frontier AI model to write code” (though I didn’t downvote), so I have to take your word for it re the rate of change, but it does seem a little contradictory to me to believe we’re on an exponential slope but also in a bubble. I guess the former is from a technological perspective and the latter financial?

Have a look at the number of Linux CVEs found this year compared to previous years - it’s humbling.

That’s one of the things that has pushed me away from the intensely skeptical end of the spectrum. But I don’t really see how this can fail to flatten out eventually. While secure software is possible at all (by which I suppose I mean cryptography, hardware, and airgaps still work as advertised), I think if anything AI will simply accelerate us towards an equilibrium, where the supply of vulnerabilities that can be found by LLM-guided brute force search is patched and exhausted.

I fear the world is in for a rough decade from all this … and anything we can do to prepare our kids to roll with the punches in that future would be wise.

Pretty bleak. But I definitely agree.

How did you arrive at that number? It’s an entire SI prefix away from the estimate I got in a sibling comment, so I assume one of us has something wrong.

Edit: oh I see your other comment with the working. I think you may have the density wrong; if a density of “1” is in kg/m³ it’s way off – the density of water and approximately-humans is usually given as 1 kg/Litre.

I don’t agree with this standpoint but I have a genuine question for you and the others in this thread, assuming you’re right: what should we be teaching kids, instead of coding? If the norm becomes not writing code by hand, what would the degree look like that gets you into one of these AI jockey jobs? Do we still teach DSA? Design patterns? Does Programming: AT&T to 3 == "3" get a one-lecture spotlight between punchcard machines and transformer architectures?

Or in the long run are you expecting that the entire software industry will essentially become a nontechnical one, and just be middle managers building things directly?

50gal is quite generous; average adult weight estimate tops out around 80kg and that doesn’t account for children. Divided by approximate human density 1010kg/m³ gives 0.08m³ or around 21gal. Multiplying that by 8 billion humans and dividing by the ocean surface area of around 361000000 km² gives approximately… 1.8μm of sea level rise.

I’m surprised and frankly a little disappointed nobody’s posted this already, but it looks like the typeface in the comic is probably Libre Baskerville. The italic “A” has half a serif clipped off.

The version on her tumblr seems to have edited the line to say “turn on” instead of “open” (also has an artist watermark). The author is Québécois, so might be a regional and/or French thing.

Yeah this seems like nonsense, but I’m guessing it’s intended more as a show of the desire for stronger regulation, the way they frame it as a stopgap until the higher levels of government come up with something more coherent.

Then again, given they’re apparently using “superintelligence” unironically, it could be they’re just a bunch of spooked Skynet doomers.

It actually seems like a reasonable (and unsurprising) take. Obviously if something is conscious, it should have rights.

That’s separate from whether current AI models have consciousness, or even the potential for consciousness, which they don’t, and that’s essentially what Suleyman is saying.

You can argue that the fact that he’s lending any credence at all to the idea is itself hype, but – loathe as I am to credit Microsoft – it seems like they’re really not on this particular train, and he’s just working within the Overton window that’s been set up by Anthropic and OpenAI’s complete disregard for truth and sanity.

New account, two sloppy text posts and a slop profile picture. Account with the same name exists on the AndroidCentral forums, also new, also talks like an unsocialised child raised in the basement of an adtech firm. Someone’s instructed it to misspell “alot”, that’s cute.

https://techcortado.com/disclaimer.html claims the posts are “written with help from AI tools, then checked and edited before they go up”. I wonder if there’s not a very deliberate omission of “by a human” in there.

Of all the fucking things to make slop.

FWIW, the numbers that are legible do seem to be accurate according to Ookla. Some are rounded the wrong way but this is probably slightly older data.

Also yes.

My thinking was that a huge proportion of the material out there for learning audio dev is C++ (and a lot is JUCE), so I can see an argument for wanting to use it. But that motivation isn’t really there if your plan is just to yell at an agent until it spits out something that compiles.

Nah it’s just Microsoft Copilot for Moon ✨.

As long as you’re vibecoding, why on earth would you choose to use C++ and/or JUCE?

Unless AI fully breaks cryptography, in that scenario we’d surely converge quickly to actually having mathematically infallible security on the blue team side? Software is finite, thus, software flaws are finite.

I’m not arguing against your username, but this article is about an Israeli malware campaign using ad bids to specifically target itself towards Starlink users. There’s nothing about Starlink itself being complicit.

I’d think if Starlink wanted to surveil their users (they probably do) they could find a more direct route than this (they probably have).

I’ve always just used a hyphen for ranges, without having any idea whether that makes me a philistine. A quick search says that, like most of this, it varies depending on who you ask.

Good luck in your rabbit hole!

Degenerative Pixels is a channel for music videos made with AI. The songs are generated in Suno, and the animation is written as code by Claude, so every scene is built by a program instead of coming out of a video generator.

It sounds like it’s explicitly not AI-generated video in the sense I think most people would mean?

Also, the irony of being told to “sign in to confirm you’re not a bot” to access a video generated by a bot.

This is either slop, marketing, or both.

For pedantry’s sake:

Two dashes – -- – in Markdown is usually rendered as an en-dash – more common in British-adjacent styles and usually surrounded by spaces.

Three dashes—---—in Markdown is rendered as an em-dash—more commonly associated with American styles and usually (though not always) without spaces.