Bigoted asshole or not, he's got a point. You've both got points. Corporations adopted DEI policies across all industries starting about 2018. The problem is that it wasn't enough to push diversity in casting. The industry also pushed diversity in the writer's room. Companies brought in writers that primarily ticked boxes with a goal toward racial, sex, and sexual orientation variety. Writing skill and experience was a distant, secondary concern. As a result, we've all seen a marked decrease in writing quality across the board. Audiences have noticed too and have reacted by doing things like cutting back on theater attendance.

Exactly. This was the same industry that was lecturing everyone on intellectual property law not that long ago. Fucking hypocrites.

That's great to say. Tell it to the food companies. The average American doesn't have a choice in the matter when they're adding it to all the food.

It's a weekly injection, not a pill. And yes, the injection also curbs addictive behavior such as gambling and alcoholism.

First off, this isn't some academic forum where we back up every single claim with evidence.

Second, I'm a progressive liberal and happen to agree with his statement, which wasn't presented in an overtly political manner. Facts don't have a political preference. There certainly are preferential admissions and hiring for women. I've seen them repeatedly over my time in school and over my 20 year career in tech. I've been told repeatedly that "everything men can do women can do better." That statement wasn't created in this thread.

Trump is gutting the EPA and other agencies that would enforce our environmental law. Business has nothing to fear. IF Trumps allows a legitimate election AND a Democrat ever wins the presidency again, they're going to first need to rebuild the entire government and the entire economy before enforcing any laws against businesses, let alone enforcing the environmental laws.

Maybe it'll start working without errors aka "hallucinations." The problem is that the technology is fundamentally disconnected from reality. It reads the writing that we've bothered to put online. But, AI has no means of independently verifying that writing. It has no independent means of verifying the truth or falsehood of a section of text. I don't see a good means for it to get that data without first changing the way in which it interacts with the real world.

These tools generate more hallucinations (aka errors) the more complex the models get. Sure, they can generate a lot of shitty output very fast. My output comes slower, but itâ(TM)s correct. And given that I generate the output myself, I can actually talk about it authoritatively in meetings.

Exactly this. The folks using AI outsource their thinking to a machine. The more they use AI, the less thinking they perform for themselves. And, the more of their own skills they lose. I can still do my job without AI. I can perform just as well as you because you're using AI as a crutch to make up for your own inadequacies. You'll become more dependent on AI over time. I'll continue to perform without it.

In many ways, it doesn't matter how many engineers the US trains because we attract engineers from other countries. That includes China. The US has a long line of engineers that want to work in the country even with Trump as President. That's unlike China. China's not a big destination for foreign tech workers. Engineers want to work for the top tech companies, which are all American. Those American companies offer the top worldwide salaries and benefits in the industry.

So sure, let China train engineers. America will take them.

Hell, we have H1-B engineers that walk straight off the plane from China into sensitive software engineering roles. If they can pass a software engineering interview, we give them jobs. Why hack infrastructure from outside a company when you can hack it with official accounts and passwords from within a company?

I've been in the industry for 20 years. Every few years some new technology comes out that industry leaders say will replace coders. So far, I've remained gainfully employed. It seems like we're always hiring more people.

Use the technology to your advantage. Record the lecture. Make watching the lecture the take-home assignment. Students can sit and listen on their own time. Reserve in-class time to actually performing work. That's when students will actually have questions that need answering - when they're attempting to apply the lesson themselves.

If you know students are going to cheat if you give them take-home assignments, then stop giving them take-home assignments! Have them write papers in class. This isn't a new idea. I remember writing in-class papers from my time in college 30 years ago.

The professors are just being lazy. They want to continue as if nothing has changed. Well, that's not the case. ChatGPT is a huge fucking change. So, adapt to it. Change your class so that students can't take advantage of that tool. Bitching about students is just lazy.

It’s not a hallucination. This is software we’re talking about. The correct way to talk about this output is to call it an error. The output is incorrect. Any other time a computer provides incorrect output, we call it an error. Calling this erroneous output a hallucination gives special status to AI that we provide no other kind of software. It doesn’t deserve that special status. Just call it an error.