Using a free software stack, you could be an effective developer with a relatively low budget. A cheap or used laptop and an internet subscription.
LLM coding is changing that too. You either need a very powerful and expensive machine to run a local model, or (currently more likely) an LLM subscription. We are lead to believe you have to pay a monthly fee to be an effective developer.
The prospect of your output as a developer being tied to a proprietary service seems risky at best.
Excuse me, no. I'm using open source MLs.
Erm, do you understand what an ML is?
Yeah, I've been at this with free stacks where possible.
LLMs are MLs,. You don't seem to understand that fact. Different abbreviation I guess, it's confusing.
>We are lead to believe you have to pay a monthly fee to be an effective developer.
Which is where the ML comes into the picture. All the coders I know, not many to be sure, but all the Rust coders I know apply Candle to their own dev/ directories.
The prospect of your output as a developer being tied to a proprietary service seems risky at best.
My output as a developer has made me moderately wealthy as these things go. I killed proprietary systems. You don't know me. The sheer effing arrogance.
> So you did indeed not read his post but decided to go full porcupine and throw a hissy fit when called out. Talk about arrogance.
Try that gaslighting shit elsewhere.
> Using a free software stack, you could be an effective developer with a relatively low budget. A cheap or used laptop and an internet subscription.
>LLM coding is changing that too. You either need a very powerful and expensive machine to run a local model, or (currently more likely) an LLM subscription. We are lead to believe you have to pay a monthly fee to be an effective developer.
To which I replied
>Excuse me, no. I'm using open source MLs.
Is it this part you don't like? Or this one?
> LLM coding is changing that too. You either need a very powerful and expensive machine to run a local model, or (currently more likely) an LLM subscription. We are lead to believe you have to pay a monthly fee to be an effective developer.
That's a begged question and it's not true either.
> The prospect of your output as a developer being tied to a proprietary service seems risky at best.
Which is, of course, bullshit.
So where's your argument, Art? Your website sure is informative.
More English lessons for you: let's parse the following sentence:
> My output as a developer
tied to a proprietary service
seems risky at best.
I lasted 40 years as a consultant and only really worked for 9 months a year for tax purposes. I did not hug a corporate tree.
And I made about 3x than my employee counterparts. How much are you clearing after taxes, Arthur? Are you brave enough to step out of the cubicle farm and make some real money?
Of course not.
Now, I'm going to put you on Mute, Arthur. It's for your own good.
Jani Nikula
tuban_muzuru
Arthur van der Harg