←back to thread

242 points sandslash | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.413s | source
Show context
w10-1 ◴[] No.44535288[source]
Not sure why this has drawn silence and attacks - whence the animus to Ng? His high-level assessments seem accurate, he's a reasonable champion of AI, and he speaks credibly based on advising many companies. What am I missing? (He does fall on the side of open models (as input factors): is that the threat?)

He argues that landscape is changing (at least quarterly), and that services are (best) replaceable (often week-to-week) because models change, but that orchestration is harder to replace, and that there are relatively few orchestration platforms.

So: what platforms are available? Are there other HN posts that assess the current state of AI orchestration?

(What's the AI-orchestration acronym? not PAAS but AIOPAAS? AOP? (since aspect-oriented programming is history))

replies(8): >>44535527 #>>44535549 #>>44535569 #>>44535659 #>>44536132 #>>44537996 #>>44539312 #>>44539997 #
lloeki ◴[] No.44539997[source]
> AOP? (since aspect-oriented programming is history)

AOP is very much alive, people that do AOP have just forgotten what the name is, and many have simply reinvented it poorly.

replies(2): >>44540276 #>>44541574 #
1. nivertech ◴[] No.44540276[source]
AOP always felt like a hack. I used it with C++ early on, and it was a preprocessor inserting ("weaving") aspects in the function entries/exits. Mostly was useful for logging. But that can be somewhat emulated using C++ constructors/destructors.

Maybe it can be also useful for DbC (Design-by-Contract) when sets of functions/methods have common pre/post-conditions and/or invariants.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect-oriented_programming#Cr...