I like to extend the idea and would ask for a more ingraned concept of versions and version migration.
Basically what flyway does but on DB level.
You could ask your DB from any backend if its in a migration status or not, it would be first class citizen were its absolutly clear that a DB migration should NOT disrupt production, it could also make it much more longrunning.
Like let me schedule a migration over 1 or 2 days through the DB and thanks to statistics and knowledge it knows to do the big chunks at night for example.
The second biggest is the missing need: Most people don't have any advantage of using crypto. They go to work, get a salary, buy/sell things and thats it.
If you don't need to buy something illegal or really believe that there is still a soviety left to take some crypto in worst case scenario, fiat is great.
I have this pet theory that the idea of decentralized currency is a bit ahead of its time, and the best consumer use case is for frequent travelers since you could more easily sidestep foreign exchange issues, and hassles.
There's a bunch of backend and b2b use cases to be explored but those also take time.
> frequent travelers since you could more easily sidestep foreign exchange issues
I don't travel internationally very frequently, but whenever I do my credit card handles currency exchange for me automatically. Perhaps I'm not getting the best exchange rate, but the difference is minimal enough that looking into alternatives isn't worth the hassle.
A paragraph from the previous essay by the OP comes to mind:
> Less sardonically, there is a lesson here: systems which intermediate between cultures are useful. Intermediating between cultures is a thing the world urgently needs and is extremely prepared to pay for.
I don't think decentralized currency will actually solve the issues travelers have with this, at least without reproducing much of the infrastructure already in place for traditional currencies.
In a quasicapitalist utopia, crypto would be a very convenient way to enable the government to set a stock value for a universal cryptocredit and make that credit its default method of value transfer.
They could do something like pin the value to 1 credit = 1 hour of unskilled menial labor, and strictly control the supply.
With appropriate software monitoring and a lack of other methods of direct wealth transfer, it would make it impossible to not properly pay your taxes and vastly more difficult to exchange wealth without government oversight, and make money crimes vastly more difficult, from hiring criminals to do crimes to purchasing drugs and weapons for illicit purposes.
It's the perfect system for a dictatorship as well.
Crypto is complex but I don't think very many people could explain how Visa's merchant payment network functions. It just does, and no one has to think about it.
Yes and thats not the case for crypto. For crypto you need to choose a cryptocoin, need to understand what a wallet is, best case install a secure wallet from the internet etc.
You don't need to know how visa works as long as you know how to register for a cc and know how to put that card into a device when paying.
>Why would you spend crypto when you could get more for it if you wait a week?
that never stopped capitalist from spending their money even if they make profit from their investment. If your logic was true, no one who has access to investment opportunities (eg. the stock market) would ever spend any money.
I think you're taking a stronger interpretation than what I wrote.
I'm not saying no one ever spent any crypto.
I'm saying that because it was deflationary, people tended to spend less than otherwise. This was so bad with bitcoin that it failed to be usable as a currency.
If my logic were true, then when interest rates were higher and people could make more money doing nothing, then people with access to investment opportunities would tend to spend less money.
I have bsaically 0 background knowledge of music and still enjoy it.
Do you know the story of the writer and his son? He wrote a book and this book was used at his sons school. The son wrote an analysis of the book and he got a bad grade because the teacher disagreed with the authors sons interpretation of his fathers book.
If an artist doesn't exactly tell us what they want us to feel, its nothing we can feel through magic.
I liked the cinemactic syncwave, but you know its a demo page. Its not included in a game, movie or something else.
There’s a better version of that story written by Asimov where a physicist is talking at a party to an English professor about a Time Machine they created that can bring famous people from the past to the present. He used it to bring William Shakespeare to the present. And Shakespeare took the English professors class on Shakespeares plays. He had to send Shakespeare back tho because he was angry that he failed the class on his own plays.
My point was that the interpretation or 'feeling' you get, doesn't has to align with what Miles Davis thought to induce.
Therefore it doesn't really matter what Miles Davis was planing to do because if Miles Davis doesn't tell you exactly what he felt and thought you would feel about it, but you still enjoy the music, you don't need a Miles Davis as long as you enjoy the music
The point is that human created songs have some sort of "soul" to it. I don't know what the reason was that the human artist chose this lyric or this beat. But some thought was put into it.
It's why I appreciate human art over AI generated art.
And i still argue that this 'soul' thing doesn't exist and it doesn't matter.
Music becomes popular not because it has a magic soul to it but because it triggers enough people at the right time.
And covers are often also super popular and i myself was not always aware that a cover was a cover. Which also indicates to me that some music wasn't magic because of its soul but because the search space for interesting/intriging music is HUGE and it takes time for us to walk through it.
Edit: Nonetheless, I do count myself to the group of people who value things more than others IF it has more personallity. Like if i know this thing is handmade and very well build vs. the same thing machine build.
But this is appreciation and luxury. In case of me not having the money to do so, i would not say that the mass produced thing is bad just because.
This same argument will be henceforth made about anything created by AI, and regardless of how ubiquitous and capable AI becomes, it will never be invalidated.
AI generated inputs will never have the soul of human created art, by definition. The soul is the intangible and inimitable kernel of emotion buried in the art by virtue of it being created by a human. It’s what separates art from ‘output’.
Of course it’s not to say AI content cannot be enjoyed, but I think as a society we will need to be increasingly mindful of cultivating and appreciating this soul wherever we can. Endless scrolling apps have shown us we humans get easily sucked into becoming content consumers, and AI is particularly well poised to generate limitless content.
This is uncharted territory for our spongy, dopamine-seeking brains. Self-awareness of our own consumption is more important than ever.
I think that's probably right too. I think it's also important to remember right now most of us are not really artists trying to tell our stories, move people, call to people, whatever, with our art. Most people playing with this stuff right now are techheads faffing around with cool new toys. In the future, I don't know how I'll feel but I suspect when I just want audible distraction, I'll be fine with an infinite loop of AI generated inoffensive tropical house. That won't be the same as seeking out or discovering something a human made, and I don't know I'll care about the tools they used to make it, I'll still be interested to learn why they made it, how they made it, etc.
I went to art school in the early 2000s, lived the second wave of analogue to digital change in the motion picture industry. I was somewhat worried about AI in art, these days I'm changing my mind, I think it will be fine/good and will push the meaning of art even further, that's always good. now I'm excited. Humans will always have emotions. Artists will always art. Humans will always seek out other humans emotions thru art.
It’s also worth pointing out that a lot of current “art” is produced under similar constraints to AI art - for commercial purposes and with algorithmic feedback. It’s easy for people to think ‘this is just as good as a human’, when they are only comparing it to soulless corporate art in the first place.
Whats your job as a AI researcher for a small company?
When you mentioned prompting, i imagined you using vertex ai or smiliar 'slightly' lower level AI tools, but thats more ML Ops for me than AI research or AI integrator.
We develop information extraction models and solve Document AI problems. But many NLP and Vision tasks can be done with foundation models by simple fine-tuning, for which you need to know very basic definitions do not need to have a post-graduate degree.
one of the fundamental problems in photogrammetry is determining the position of the camera in 3D space, with a game engine you just have a concrete value for your camera position, removing that entire problem. I don't know too much about photogrammetry but i'd imagine once your camera position is 100% accurate it's a lot easier to construct the point cloud accurately.
I like to extend the idea and would ask for a more ingraned concept of versions and version migration.
Basically what flyway does but on DB level.
You could ask your DB from any backend if its in a migration status or not, it would be first class citizen were its absolutly clear that a DB migration should NOT disrupt production, it could also make it much more longrunning.
Like let me schedule a migration over 1 or 2 days through the DB and thanks to statistics and knowledge it knows to do the big chunks at night for example.