Apart from the apologising. It's silly when the AI apologises with ever more sincere apologies. There should be no apologies from AIs.
It depends, because you now have to pay in order to be able to compete against other programmers who're also using AI tools, it wasn't like that in what I'd call the true "golden age", basically the '90s - early part of the 2000s, when the internet was already a thing and one could put together something very cool with just a "basic" text editor.
We used to serve others, but now people are so excited about serving themselves first that there's almost no talk of service to others at all anymore
"..the user suggests using XYZ to move forward, but that would be rather inefficient, perhaps the user is not totally aware of the characteristics of XYZ. We should suggest moving forward with ABC and explain why it is the better choice..."
I get popcorn and wait for more work coming my way 5 years down the road. Someone will have tidy this mess up and gen-covid will have lost all ability to think on their own by then.
Especially if your code contains a few bugs, misconceptions, and is sometimes completely unable to fix mistakes, going back and forth into the same wrong solutions.
This is not to say that AI assistants are useless. They are a good productivity tool, and I can output code much faster, especially for domains I am very familiar with.
That said, these starry-eyed AI circlejerk threads are incredibly cringe.
we literally creating solution for our own problem
Maintaining a codebase isn't going to be a thing in the future, at least not in the traditional/current sense.
The Omega Directive: https://snth.prose.sh/the_omega_directive
I tend to form the story arc in my head, and outline the major events in a timeline, and create very short summaries of important scenes, then use AI to turn those summaries into rough narrative outlines by asking me questions and then using my answers to fill in the details.
Next I'll feed that abbreviated manuscript into AI and brainstorm as to what's missing/where the flow could use improvement/etc with no consideration for prose quality, and start filling in gaps with new scenes until I feel like I have a compelling rough outline.
Then I just plow from beginning to end rewriting each chapter, first with AI to do a "beta" draft, then I rewrite significant chunks by hand to make things really sharp.
After this is done I'll feed the manuscript back into AI and get it to beta read given my target audience profile and ambitions for the book, and ask it to provide me feedback on how I can improve the book. Then I start editing based on this, occasionally adding/deleting scenes or overhauling ones that don't quite work based on a combination of my and AI's estimation. When Gemini starts telling me it can't think of much to improve the manuscript that's when it's time for human beta readers.
I've been wondering about what the legalities of the generated content are though since we know that a lot of the artistic source content was used without consent?C an I put the stories on my blog? Or, not that I wanted to, publish them? I guess people use AI generated code everywhere so I guess for practical purposes the cat is out the bag and won't be put back in again.
Pay-as-you-go with Gemini does not snort your data for their own purposes (allegedly...).
Not happening. Investors would riot.
Looking forward to stage 2 - start serving the advertisers while placating the users, and finally stage 3 - offering it all up to the investors while playing the advertisers off each other and continuing to placate the users.