Always interesting to see the fascist take. Oh wait... no it's not.

I agree. Questions like this often seem to come from people who don’t *want* to use AI, or perhaps are afraid of it for whatever reason, and they’re looking for reasons that they shouldn’t use it.

It was Andrej Karpathy, one of the world’s top AI engineers.

Description of the term: https://x.com/karpathy/status/...

About him: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

I’ve stopped arguing with people about it (mostly haha) for this reason. They’re either going to have to figure it soon enough without our help, or as you say be left behind.

This matches how I use it. I’ll add a few other points:

4. Writing the first core version of a service or UI. I’ll typically use close to 100% of those generated lines, and then continue building with LLM assistance where it makes sense. It makes a big difference to development velocity.
5. Finding bugs. If some bug isn’t obvious to me, provide the code to an LLM and describe the problem. Its success rate is high.
6. Working with tech I’m not particularly familiar with (an extension of your #3, i.e. learning)
7. Writing documentation.
8. Reverse engineering existing code, i.e. describe some code to me so I don’t have to dig through it in detail.
9. Writing unit tests.

What do you object to, her support for equality or her opposition to genocide? Or is it that a woman stated an opinion?

So, the functional equivalent of reasoning?

Are you saying that ChatGPT, Claude, Deepseek etc. “make heavy use of external tools” to write code? Because they all write pretty good code, up to a certain size of program. Certainly far better than the average human, who can’t code at all; or the average software developer, who isn’t really very good.

For those unfamiliar, "DRM" refers to Digital Rights Management. Basically, DRM tech prevents you from playing back any content on devices that have not been explicitly authorized to do so by large media companies. Of course, free playback still exists, but these days, most officially distributed movies, TV shows, games, etc., all involve some form of DRM unless explicitly advertised as DRM-free. (FTFY)

Dutch motorist Tim Hanssen (double s, ends on single n) wrote a blogpost about it. And here it is: https://nippur.nl/tim-versus-politie-algoritme/ (go find a translator als je geen Nederlands kunt lezen)

Linking to a random international site (jpost) that quotes (but not links) another random site (HLN, not exactly know for its fine journalism) without trying to find the original is beyond bad journalism.

https://github.com/SamiaKabir/ChatGPT-Answers-to-SO-questions

That "solution" is wrong. It would mean that anyone (and any corporation) could get away with "oh it's not my fault, we're not liable, it's an open source component that did it".

The law should help corporations take their responsibilities (i.e. help fix open source components) without putting the burden on devs that are not paid by these corporations.

There isn't really any proof that Waymo vehicles are driverless, only that the driver isn't in the vehicle. If you compare a dozen dubiously driverless vehicles to a million collecting data every moment and already doing a pretty good job at autonomy, which do you think will succeed?

The fact that the driver is not in the vehicle does not mean that there is no driver.

https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.15.21249885 , principal author is Daniel Ayoubkhani (ORCID: 0000-0001-6352-0394). (Why is Slashdot citing Yahoo citing The Telegraph?)