The parent is useless. Slashdot was once a tech site instead of this general news for the typical retard.
Anyone have some QUALITY reading material on the subject? We will never see that from the editors who really should be replaced by AI which would do a better job on a bad day than they've done for many years.
Media bullshitted America for views since long before electricity.
Fear sells to the simpleton masses terrified of what they don't understand. US literacy is poor and comprehension terrible.
This will not improve because intelligence is not a choice.
So they posted none.
Creators are free to compete and create collectively or their own.
They sell their work for what the market will bear if they want money. If they wish to create for arts sake they are free to use AI to enhance their product with their professional insight, or ignore it and market their work on its own merits as determined by the customer.
The market will decide. Artists are free to create but not entitled to customers. Anyone is free to create for the joy of it. If they want money they serve the customer.
The vast majority of entertainment has always been trifling so what is really at stake when automating kitsch generation? If Great Artists are so great, they are free to prove it independently.
Development does not require empowering AI to do act upon anything important.
That's not really been part of the discussion because greed.
No matter how many old men yell at clouds, tools improve.
Presuming AI will remain crude is odd for techies but Slashdot (by management, especially moderator intent) is no longer a tech site.
There are no inherent obstacles to effective use of AI. Successful movies already use computer-generated content aplenty. The Matrix is now very old news.
The entertainment industry exists for profit, not welfare.
The gaming industry is already larger than Hollywood and
animation (by any name) will only improve.
Scripts are "code". Interposing fewer humans between script and finished result lowers costs and democratizes production by reducing physical (including equipment and set) footprint.
As movies obsoleted theater so computers are obsoleting old ways to make video. That's a natural evolution, similar to how CNC machining obsoleted factory floors of manual standard and specialty manual machine tools. Those tools still exist and get frequent use, but not for mass production.
Can't do it. I'm refactoring on a large code base. I eventually had to tell it to work on just one task and ignore other concerns it had to prevent it from investigating until it got stuck in a cycle of investigation.
Understood, and yeah single tasking seems like a good workaround given the situation. Or switching to an LLM with a larger context window, if possible/practical. I was able to get about 7X more context window "runway" using the AST approach, but it's a relatively small code base to begin with.
A feature of Linux is anyone can code what they care about.
Charity carries no obligation.
Users merely use. We should remember how little we matter, and that if we want something different we're free to learn to code what we want.
Sounds like you're running up against the context window of whatever LLM you're using. Try converting your code to a minified abstract syntax tree first and pass that to your LLM, and ask it what full text it needs in addition to that. It should stay within the context window much better that way.
"Look! There! Evil!.. pure and simple, total evil from the Eighth Dimension!" -- Buckaroo Banzai
