ThunderSizzle

For half my coworkers, their LLM code is better than their code.

Emphasis on the "terrible" part of the junior.

The cheaper models can't be taught or improved due to their inherit limitations, which makes it a huge pain to even try with even the simplest of tasks. Perpetually, no matter your instruction file(s).

Since schooling closer to home obviously solves this problem, and a host of many other problems, and doesn't introduce any real problems (bad schools don't save kids from bad parents, which seems to be a rebuttal to home-based education, it would seem to me the answer is obvious:

Return to a single income household economy and bring education closer to the home, if not outright in the home.

Jokes on you—humans write trash all the time.

Agreed. Modern news is beyond lazy, and is not journalism by any means. Too many talking heads do nothing but sit behind a screen watching others for what to say next.

Granted, a few of the remaining newspapers I'm aware of run business awards (Best restaurant, etc), and the way to win is via wining and dining them, even though the paper claims it's based on people's votes.

That style of thinking - of entitlement - probably brought the lack of interest in both cable news and traditional web/paper outlets - as the younger generations started to see through it more.

The engineers running the AI have to still be good.

AI code that isn't properly guided and controlled by an engineer is just as sloppy as the human behind it.

AI is an accelerate for programming, but some developers create horrible code before AI, snd AI won't change that. It just lets them do it faster.

It's being stated as fact, not as an opinion.

Google is stating in a position of authority. It's therefore being stated as at least a professional opinion with the equivalent weight of fact, or representing facts.

If the opinion is meant to be just another opinion, then it shouldn't cause any blacklisting of any sorts anywhere.

Without a deadline of some form, when do you escalate to public knowledge so customers can know they might get defrauded in some capacity?

Github Copilot let's you pick the underlying model, including Claude models.

Is the problem you observed true regardless of the model you picked?

Today's Health insurance and health care is entirely a product of government intervention on multiple layers.

Health insurance being tied to employment benefits is because the IRS taxes money, but not benefits, for example.

Already could file free with free tax usa.

Not that impressive.

I'd be more impressed we got rid of income tax on salaried people entirely, or permit families the same type of deductions that businesses get, and only tax my actual profit - I can't deduct my overpriced housing, or my utilities unless I have a home office for ny own business.

Every website would then become a snake oil salesman for buying their subscription.

It'd be like streaming today. Fragmented, expensive, and useless. And no one would like it.

Beyond that, websites would still need people to be addicted to justify the sub.

And furthermore, "sponsorships" will still occur behind the sub wall.

Jokes on them. I won't buy either. I'll stick with my home assistant a d locally owned devices.

Lost internet today for hours and for once, my local devices had no issues. It depresses me I was even interested in app-based devices.

> GPL does not allow

Sure, that's what the paper says. Most people don't care what that says until some ramifications actually occur. E.g. a cease and desist letter. Maybe people should care, but companies have been stealing IP from individuals long before GPL, and they still do.

That's what you can do. Tell the AI to make a plan in an MD file, review and edit it, and then tell another AI to execute the plan. If the plan is too long, split it into steps.

I've seen many discussions stating patent hoarding has gone too far, and also that copyright for companies have gone way too far (even so much that Amazon can remove items from your purchase library if they lose their license to it).

Then AI begins to offer a method around this over litigious system, and this becomes a core anti-AI argument.

I do think it's silly to think public code (as in, code published to the public) won't be re-used by someone in a way your license dictates. I'd you didn't want that to happen, don't publish your code.

Having said that, I do think there's a legitimate concern here.

Enough so that I've never had a runtime issue because the compiler did something odd once, and correct thr next time. At least in c#. If Java is doing that, then stop using it...

If the compiler had an issue like LLMs do, the half my builds would be broken, running the same source.

Barrier to entry is simple: both Google and Apple heavily discourage "sideloading" or make it practically impossible.

Google is moving in that direction.

If you aren't running Windows, you probably aren't using Office. Half the reason for Office is Exchange, and half the reason is the integration of Exchange with Active Directory.

Without any of that, does Office make sense anymore compared to something like GSuite?

The idea the manufacturer of a product is a "first party" is BS.

You are the first party. If I own the device, I am the first party.

The manufacturer is now a second or third party after you own the device, and for most ideas, a third party, especially if they don't truly offer real support of the device.

If you need to sacrifice your freedom for a little bit of security, then you deserve neither. It's true with this too.

Most rules/laws don't actually stop problems, they just hide them.

?

If you have a cushy job where you don't really work, and you make a lot of money (doesn't mean you have capital), how does that translate to being suited to becoming an entrepreneur with the money they are no longer earning with the effort capacity they apparently don't have?

Did you verify the 35 sources it used or are we now supposed to just trust everything on the internet if an LLM prints it now?

Where does the fine money go? To the victims?

> Since AI companies claim fair use no copyright applies. There is no fixing this.

They can claim whatever they want. You can still try to stop it via lawsuits and make them claim it in court. Granted, I believe there's already been some jurisdictions that have sided with fair use in those particular cases.

That was decided when crypto mining became too expensive, I guess.

Everyone is trying to be the shovel sales person for AI, not the gold diggers buying shovels.

I'm not sure if even the LLM companies themselves are selling shovels yet. I think everyone is racing to find what the shovel of LLMs are.

Put plainly, any sort of expectations as if they other person is an employee or coworker makes no sense to me.

If Google wants bugs fixed in open source software, they should also submit a PR with the fix, or provide a bounty for the fix.

The way this is done is an unveiled threat (if it was my library, I'd tell them as much. Deadlines are for vendors or employees, not for free libraries).

"We" don't have passkeys now. Many functional android devices are not being upgraded to the latest Android versions, and simply will never get true passkey support that isn't locked away inside of Google's vault.

Passwords are much better than the OAuth2 coolaid, and passwords will still be better as long as older devices can't support passkeys due to arbitrary restrictions.