The AI use thing is a bit iffy, as the "upper middle class" people are using it heavily simply because the tools currently on offer are made for the type of work they do (and remember: if you are a FAANG engineer, you are very solidly in the "upper middle class").

There's no "productivity growth attributed to AI" -- yet.

I think we've gone beyond anecdotal evidence of experience engineers finding true value in this new tech. It may not have registered yet, but skilled people are unequivocally finding value in these tools.

I agree that we have yet to settle down on the true costs involved (which will probably end up at "slightly less than a junior engineer" or something like that) - but we are months beyond the idea that it's all smoke and mirrors and no one is getting value out of it.

There’s a difference between the engineer getting value and the firm.

It can be true that the engineer is more productive but the end result is the firm is in a net negative state.

I think part of the problem is that it is such a generic catch all term:

- AI will replace all workers (unlikely today) - AI speeds up programming (yes today)

I get you, but as the months progress, we keep finding that more and more experienced engineers are finding a lot of time-saving value in this new tech.

I think we are past the point where we can just dismiss their input - these new tools do legitimately add value, it appears.

> experienced engineers are finding a lot of time-saving value in this new tech

Experienced engineers are always finding "time-saving value in new tech". This is a tale as old as the craft of programming itself, and all the hundreds and thousands of ways to hack the development experience engineers obsess over has never resulted in tangible gains for delivering quality software on time.

> but this time the LLM technology is magic and it will be different!

How many more SOTA models? How many more weeks? Will you "trust the plan" forever?

On the off chance you care - you can keep javascript disabled on this article, and just a No Style page style to read it.

Article is a bit short. Here's a few more to flesh out the topic and the plant, tho honestly only by a smidge (none of these links require javascript enabled)

https://naturalhistory.si.edu/research/botany/news/plant-pre...

https://www.earth.com/news/native-fungi-native-trees-plants-...

https://matjournals.net/pharmacy/index.php/IJPPR/article/vie...

https://ijpsr.com/?action=download_pdf&postid=97498

In regards to the first method, are you saying that the skins of beans are the majority source of undigestible sugars in beans?

<edit> actually, come to think of it, fiber is also a source of gas. Are the skins of beans the higher source of fiber?

I'm not very familiar with this topic. What is the chemical mechanism through which you feel that baking soda reduces undigestible sugars in beans?

A minor thing - I know that article is part of a broader body of work and is not meant to solely present your ideas by itself. But nonetheless, since you linked to it, I had to scan down quite a bit to answer the question that was immediately on my mind: "tax reform for what purpose and why?"

And, an aside, I'd personally recommend getting rid of the emoji bullet-point additions: in this day and age, well, you know.

Good points! Thanks.

"annexed Hong Kong prematurely" ? I'm not sure what you mean here.

Reports I've read are that China was surprised when the UK got in touch a few years before 97, wanting to start the prep work for the handover of HK. China, it seems, just assumed the UK would call HK a historical legacy whose lease agreement was made with a now-defunct country, and leave it at that without a handover.

I've done so. I saw a country that is a mix of third and first, full of wonderful people who the government fear so much they have to cut them off from the rest of the world and run the place as a police state.