Well you can do the Occam's razor / Russell's teapot thing, and ask why should there be any specific thing in the absence of (unlooked-for) evidence. Perhaps it's an epidemic of silliness, you know, or itchiness, or moodiness? Could be anything or nothing.

Despite the lack of data, I have no hunch that there is any such trend anyway. Just wanted to say that before somebody inevitably says the opposite.

My gut feeling says: don't ask me, I'm a gut.

The microbiome has now entered the room.

The hand-written code solves problems. Many of those are problems about how to write code. In your world, these are apparently invalidated as problems now, due to becoming less profitable: by "problem" you mean "profitable problem". Is chasing after profitable problems noble and special, I don't know, it serves demand, demand matters somewhat, fine then. But it's not the epitome of problem-solving.

Could you all stop plotting to kill me off >:(

Strong, too, she's stuck her thumb right through that plate of two-inch spaghetti pieces.

> moral vacuum, and that's not an accident

Well that's a philosophical point, because morality is bound up with opinions and personality and internal motivation, and quite possibly with creativity and with whatever intelligence really means. So it probably can't be designed into LLMs, and struggles with "alignment" probably aren't faked.

> So it [meaning morality] probably can't be designed into LLMs ...

Well, it could, but a preliminary step would be to get everyone to agree about what constitutes morality, which will never happen. So in essence I agree.

Uncertain, doubtful: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49791435

(lit. "No, get the tuberculosis".)

Dutch is fairly unique in how it uses diseases as expletives, whereas most other languages use body parts or excrement. TB even has the honour of having two expletives named after it (tering and pleuris).

Whenever "shit hits the fan" we say "Tuberculosis broke out" ("de pleuris brak uit/is uitgebroken").

I quite like truth, don't you? Or are you not a fan of it?

I mean I quite like jokes, metaphor, and libel, but one should probably have some restraint, details TBD.

Let's take speech away from people because they can't handle the freedom, then?

What should you not do here doesn't mean what will we stop you doing. It just means what's the wrong thing to do?

Maybe you're worrying about social pressure? I can see how general agreement that it's wrong to do XYZ can lead to forcibly preventing anybody at all from doing XYZ.