Location: Sydney, Australia
Remote: Remote or hybrid.
Willing to relocate: No
Technologies: .NET, JavaScript / Typescript (Node, React, etc). Azure, AWS,
Résumé/CV: Please reply if interested, and I'll shoot my through my CV and contact details :)
Email: Ditto
Senior/lead engineer, 10+ years experience. Currently looking for a role at a tech/product company after a few years as a tech lead in consulting/agency land. Have focused extensively on communication and management skills in my previous role however I am primarily (but not exclusively) looking for IC/senior roles to refocus on tech skills a bit.
Strengths (IMO): I've previously been the go-to for solving tougher problems. Have uplifted engineering standards and practices. Good communication skills and ability to build rapport with team members and client stakeholders, also able to grasp bigger picture/strategic context of projects.
I've been lurking on HN for ages and hardly ever see job postings in AU (I think I'm the only commenter from Sydney so far!) so if anyone out there is hiring I'll be very interested :-)
Its context window is quite large -- 8192 tokens, where a token is about ~4 characters. But it's quite possible they are using GPT itself to summarize the older parts of the conversation so they can fit more in by only keeping the important bits.
I made some tweaks to sound like a slightly ticked off typical HN poster
--
It irks me to see the frequent misconceptions surrounding GPT-based models like ChatGPT being touted as true general intelligences. While they are certainly advanced in their text generation capabilities, their output is primarily derived from identifying patterns and associations within the training data. These models lack the capacity for introspection, learning, and true understanding that characterizes human cognition.
Let's not forget the limitations of these models, specifically in regards to problem-solving, decision-making and creativity. The output may appear novel, but it is more likely a recombination of previously encountered information.
In short, GPT-based models are a remarkable achievement in natural language processing, but let's not mistake them for true AI.
--
and then I asked it to make it sound like Steve Ballmer.
"Look, I'm gonna be real with you here. ChatGPT and these other GPT-based models, they're not true AIs. They're just really good at pattern matching, right? They can generate text that looks like it's intelligent, but it's not really thinking or learning or understanding like a human does.
Now, don't get me wrong, these models are still incredibly powerful and useful for certain tasks, especially in natural language processing. But let's not pretend they're something they're not. They can't solve problems or make decisions or be creative like a human can.
So let's call a spade a spade here. These GPT models are impressive, but they're not true AIs. And that's just the way it is."
I asked the opposite (also in an irate Steve Ballmer style) and got this. [Edit: put an even more irate version in a reply]
"I can't believe it, people are still doubting the capabilities of ChatGPT! Do they not remember the days of Clippy? ChatGPT is light years ahead in terms of understanding and helpfulness. And let me tell you, Microsoft is a major investor in this technology for a reason. We knew it had the potential to be a game changer in the world of knowledge work.
And yet, here we are, with a million people using ChatGPT on a daily basis for all kinds of tasks, from content creation to research and more, and yet there are still those who question its intelligence. Let me tell you, ChatGPT is not some dumb robot with no understanding. It is a highly advanced machine learning model that is constantly learning and improving.
Even Google is feeling threatened by the capabilities of ChatGPT. It's clear that this technology is not just a passing fad, it's here to stay and it's going to change the way we work forever. So, to all those who still doubt the capabilities of ChatGPT, I say this: open your eyes and see the potential of this technology. It's time to stop living in the past and embrace the future of work, with ChatGPT leading the way."
Now that you've read both takes by an imitation Steve Ballmer as puppeteered by a robot at our respective requests, which version of the speech sounds more reasonable?
And I asked it to make it sound even more like Ballmer:
"I'll tell you what, folks. I am PISSED that people still don't understand the power of this technology! You remember Clippy? Ha! That thing was a JOKE compared to what we have here. This is the real DEAL, folks.
And let me tell you, Microsoft is all IN on this technology. We invested in it because we know it's the FUTURE of knowledge work. And yet, here we are, with a million people using it every day and still, some folks are questioning its intelligence.
I'm here to tell you, this is not some DUMB ROBOT with no understanding. It's a highly advanced machine learning model that's always getting SMARTER. And let me tell you, even GOOGLE is feeling the HEAT from this technology.
This technology is here to STAY, folks. It's going to change the way we work and it's time for everyone to get on BOARD. So, to all those who still doubt the capabilities of this technology, I say this: WAKE UP and see the potential of this technology. It's time to stop living in the PAST and embrace the FUTURE of work, with Microsoft leading the way."
No, a good number of Rails devs stayed around and it became more of a mature community, but the hype driven growth/mindshare was over. There is a certain loud percentage of webdevs driven by fashion, and that portion follow the latest fashion around around. Rails lost some to Node, Node lost some to things like Go and/or React as API backed SPAs grew.
I really doubt many Rails devs went to .NET. In those days Ruby was pretty bad on Windows machines (might still be?), and nearly all Rails devs were Mac users.
I never knew .NET MVC was Rails inspired - I always assumed it would've been closer in style to the older Java MVC frameworks Rails was keen to disrupt in the beginning.
This. It's also a very common and controversial topic where everyone has their own goddamned opinion they think is right - hence it's going to generate a firestorm of debate wherever it's posted.
Except on HN because it's probably going to get nuked.
It took me a few tries to get it to spit out a perfectly reasonable continuation of a chess game. There's a filter that goes "I can't play games blah blah blah I can only complete text!" but once I got past it, it gave me a series of basically optimal chess moves.
I'm pretty sure I asked it to complete the text for the following 1. e4 d5 2. ....
Strengths (IMO): I've previously been the go-to for solving tougher problems. Have uplifted engineering standards and practices. Good communication skills and ability to build rapport with team members and client stakeholders, also able to grasp bigger picture/strategic context of projects.
I've been lurking on HN for ages and hardly ever see job postings in AU (I think I'm the only commenter from Sydney so far!) so if anyone out there is hiring I'll be very interested :-)
Thanks!