From: user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid   
      
   lol yes and i still need to talk to a human for even basic customer   
   service resolutions 🤷   
      
   anyways, dude who bolted a front end onto gpt is writing a hype article   
      
   not really worthy news for this sub   
      
   On 2/18/26 10:52 AM, Wilson wrote:   
   > By Matt Shumer • Feb 9, 2026   
   >   
   > Think back to February 2020. If you were paying close attention, you   
   > might have noticed a few people talking about a virus spreading   
   > overseas. But most of us weren't paying close attention. The stock   
   > market was doing great, your kids were in school, you were going to   
   > restaurants and shaking hands and planning trips. If someone told you   
   > they were stockpiling toilet paper you would have thought they'd been   
   > spending too much time on a weird corner of the internet. Then, over the   
   > course of about three weeks, the entire world changed. Your office   
   > closed, your kids came home, and life rearranged itself into something   
   > you wouldn't have believed if you'd described it to yourself a month   
   > earlier.   
   >   
   > I think we're in the "this seems overblown" phase of something much,   
   > much bigger than Covid.   
   >   
   > I've spent six years building an AI startup and investing in the space.   
   > I live in this world. And I'm writing this for the people in my life who   
   > don't... my family, my friends, the people I care about who keep asking   
   > me "so what's the deal with AI?" and getting an answer that doesn't do   
   > justice to what's actually happening. I keep giving them the polite   
   > version. The cocktail-party version. Because the honest version sounds   
   > like I've lost my mind. And for a while, I told myself that was a good   
   > enough reason to keep what's truly happening to myself. But the gap   
   > between what I've been saying and what is actually happening has gotten   
   > far too big. The people I care about deserve to hear what is coming,   
   > even if it sounds crazy.   
   >   
   > I should be clear about something up front: even though I work in AI, I   
   > have almost no influence over what's about to happen, and neither does   
   > the vast majority of the industry. The future is being shaped by a   
   > remarkably small number of people: a few hundred researchers at a   
   > handful of companies... OpenAI, Anthropic, Google DeepMind, and a few   
   > others. A single training run, managed by a small team over a few   
   > months, can produce an AI system that shifts the entire trajectory of   
   > the technology. Most of us who work in AI are building on top of   
   > foundations we didn't lay. We're watching this unfold the same as you...   
   > we just happen to be close enough to feel the ground shake first.   
   >   
   >   
   > For years, AI had been improving steadily. Big jumps here and there, but   
   > each big jump was spaced out enough that you could absorb them as they   
   > came. Then in 2025, new techniques for building these models unlocked a   
   > much faster pace of progress. And then it got even faster. And then   
   > faster again. Each new model wasn't just better than the last... it was   
   > better by a wider margin, and the time between new model releases was   
   > shorter. I was using AI more and more, going back and forth with it less   
   > and less, watching it handle things I used to think required my expertise.   
   >   
   > Then, on February 5th, two major AI labs released new models on the same   
   > day: GPT-5.3 Codex from OpenAI, and Opus 4.6 from Anthropic (the makers   
   > of Claude, one of the main competitors to ChatGPT). And something   
   > clicked. Not like a light switch... more like the moment you realize the   
   > water has been rising around you and is now at your chest.   
   >   
   > I am no longer needed for the actual technical work of my job. I   
   > describe what I want built, in plain English, and it just... appears.   
   > Not a rough draft I need to fix. The finished thing. I tell the AI what   
   > I want, walk away from my computer for four hours, and come back to find   
   > the work done. Done well, done better than I would have done it myself,   
   > with no corrections needed. A couple of months ago, I was going back and   
   > forth with the AI, guiding it, making edits. Now I just describe the   
   > outcome and leave.   
   >   
   > Let me give you an example so you can understand what this actually   
   > looks like in practice. I'll tell the AI: "I want to build this app.   
   > Here's what it should do, here's roughly what it should look like.   
   > Figure out the user flow, the design, all of it." And it does. It writes   
   > tens of thousands of lines of code. Then, and this is the part that   
   > would have been unthinkable a year ago, it opens the app itself. It   
   > clicks through the buttons. It tests the features. It uses the app the   
   > way a person would. If it doesn't like how something looks or feels, it   
   > goes back and changes it, on its own. It iterates, like a developer   
   > would, fixing and refining until it's satisfied. Only once it has   
   > decided the app meets its own standards does it come back to me and say:   
   > "It's ready for you to test." And when I test it, it's usually perfect.   
   >   
   > I'm not exaggerating. That is what my Monday looked like this week.   
   >   
   > But it was the model that was released last week (GPT-5.3 Codex) that   
   > shook me the most. It wasn't just executing my instructions. It was   
   > making intelligent decisions. It had something that felt, for the first   
   > time, like judgment. Like taste. The inexplicable sense of knowing what   
   > the right call is that people always said AI would never have. This   
   > model has it, or something close enough that the distinction is starting   
   > not to matter.   
   >   
   > I've always been early to adopt AI tools. But the last few months have   
   > shocked me. These new AI models aren't incremental improvements. This is   
   > a different thing entirely.   
   >   
   > And here's why this matters to you, even if you don't work in tech.   
   >   
   > The AI labs made a deliberate choice. They focused on making AI great at   
   > writing code first... because building AI requires a lot of code. If AI   
   > can write that code, it can help build the next version of itself. A   
   > smarter version, which writes better code, which builds an even smarter   
   > version. Making AI great at coding was the strategy that unlocks   
   > everything else. That's why they did it first. My job started changing   
   > before yours not because they were targeting software engineers... it   
   > was just a side effect of where they chose to aim first.   
   >   
   > They've now done it. And they're moving on to everything else.   
   >   
   > The experience that tech workers have had over the past year, of   
   > watching AI go from "helpful tool" to "does my job better than I do", is   
   > the experience everyone else is about to have. Law, finance, medicine,   
   > accounting, consulting, writing, design, analysis, customer service. Not   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)