ironqcold

I really can't disagree. What's the point of all this talk if for most ordinary people these technologies do more harm than good?

In general, feeding the AI what you write for verification sounds like a good idea. But I think even this should only be done by someone who understands exactly what they're doing, how, and why, because otherwise they won't be able to analyze the accuracy of the AI's responses...

I think we're still in the early days of figuring out how to use AI as a daily work tool. It's going to take time to develop the right practices. I do see the point in having token limits, they force you to be intentional. My guess is that eventually we'll end up with small, local LLMs that are unlimited for routine stuff, and we'll save the big expensive models (with quotas) for the heavy lifting.

I noticed that too.The writing style itself seems a bit strange. I'm not deep into superconductors, so I can't judge the science itself but I have doubts about how much trust this article can give.

Quote lists are kinda hit or miss.

Half the time

I don't think AI is killing open source.

It's just making it way easier to spam maintainers with code.

Good contributors are probably worth even more now.