Now consider the effects, long-term, of these differentials on our culture and politics.
Well, yes
That's just
Now, if you'd rather that be done by the feisty followers of a certain Mo, well, okay
... and figure out technological remedies. Like scrubbing and sequestering CO2, and going nuclear.
Or we could just emote and blame. But that doesn't seem terribly effective.
As much as we'd all like to imagine the hypocrisy of one of the world's largest companies asking its employees for free labor, that doesn't seem to be what's happening here.
But
"Volunteering" to take extra shifts has been a thing forever, all over the place.
It doesn't mean the same thing as "volunteering" to work without pay.
And you know that
demanding that wealthy nations fund mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions in poorer nations.
And in turn, I demand a pony.
Oh wait, people can't just up and demand stuff? Dang.
This likely is an LLM scraper designed to specifically target Media Wiki sites with a botnet.
What does that even mean?
LLMs doing crawling? That might be ill-behaved, bot not an "attack".
Or does it mean LLM-written attack software?
Or "attack software that somehow utilizes some LLM"?
It wasn't long before the edited image's gibberish text and hazy edges drew criticism from social media users.
What a relief. Drugs with well-defined edges are much safer!
In fact, LLM models already show signs of ageing because updating training data gets more and more tricky due to too much AI Slop out there and model collapse.
So which is it? Were LLMs useless all along (like, ahem, you've been saying all along), or they are just now "aging" and getting worse?
In 10 years time, you'll deny you ever believed such a ridiculous thing.
Nope. It's a tool. Used properly, it's helpful. Used improperly, it isn't.
Neither a panacea nor "useless". Just a tool.
It is worth pointing out that the backend models powering Copilot remain closed source. So no, you won't be able to self host the whole experience or train your own Copilot.
No, but unless the API is super opaque, it should make it simpler to implement your own back end. should you be so inclined.
In each of these cases, you do have to know what you're doing, and you have to be able to know when it's right. But the things it does, do save me time and research effort.
Likewise.
They are just tools. Each user has to learn how to use them for their own use cases. They are neither panaceas nor useless.
In short, "AI coding" is not as mystical as it seems. Doing little that prior sets of tools were not doing. It's just more convenient, perhaps automating the use of numerous such existing tools. It still requires a skeptical review of the code and likely the addition of defensive code.
Right. It's a tool.
It's not the singularity, and it's also not "useless" like some energetic posters here want it to be. LLMs are just tools, which devs need to figure out how best to use for their use cases.
If you write "good enough" using agents, don't expect me to fix it for you when it goes horribly wrong.
The literal meaning of "good enough" would be "doesn't need any more fixing than your manual code does".
But I'm sure yours is all perfect
"Paul Lynde to block..." -- a contestant on "Hollywood Squares"
