ssfdg

I agree with this too and I find this article extremely depressing.

The AI "revolution" as described here is the wholesale outsourcing of vast swaths of thinking and decision-making to a single entity. A project coded with Claude is a project coded by Anthropic. A business whose decisions are made with ChatGPT is a business run by OpenAI.

Is that what these people really want? To become a conduit through which two or three companies get to exert control over everything in the world?

"Those who gained experience with the old tech were essentially AI models trained on statistically good probabilities of getting good shot"

I am so glad I am not you. What a miserable way to live your life.

I don't buy this analogy and I think it takes a depressingly reductive view of creativity. In both cases, the photographers had to take the time to go to a place, see a view they thought was worth capturing, operated their equipment to get a shot, and then had enough discernment to recognize which of their final products were worth something. Both the traditional photographer and the modern photographer can create images of value in different ways.

If you want to shoehorn AI into this analogy at all then no one is even bothering going hiking at this point, let alone seeing anything worth capturing. It would just vomit up endless permutations of statistically average images that look like the kind of pictures people take of landscapes.

Correction: OpenAI carried out an attack on RubyGems.

I am gobsmacked at the tech industry's seemly bottomless appetite for giving these clowns the benefit of the doubt.

Are posts like that really DIY? They're more like increasingly elaborate and convoluted ways of getting something else to do it for you

I don't understand the point of this. If they wanted to make a Python interpreter, why didn't they just ask an AI to do it?