

Not really; usually when something doesn’t work as you like on Windows youre SOL…


Not really; usually when something doesn’t work as you like on Windows youre SOL…


If they’re used to chase down people the general public doesn’t like, it might even be applauded.


Efficient yes, but humanoid robots are much more likely to be accepted by the general public.


Have you considered that the down votes are because your comment adds nothing to the discussion except ragebait?


Even better when it also does “emergency avoidance” and sends you right into guardrails or oncoming traffic. That happens only once to you unwanted during the lifetime of the car and you immediately turn that shit off forever.


There should be a ceiling with patents, where if you make 10x back of what it cost your r&d (or whatever 5x of your yearly revenue), the patent should just be considered expired no matter how much time passed.
It should never be an infinite source of money.


I mean that you would have to test yourself. To me it seems like AI funnily enough has the same issues as humans, and that’s that it works worse in legacy codebases full of tech debt, and in large monoliths.
But it can still be an invaluable tool.


Indeed the more skilled you are the more infuriating it becomes when it does the dumbest shit.


It can write code decently well and fast, and is amazing at finding stuff in a large project.
But you still 100% need to verify what it does and truly understand it.


Personally, I think a moral company would offer permanent discounts to long term customers, but there isn’t a single company on earth I’m aware of that actually does that.
JetBrains do it with their IDE subscriptions, they give you a massive discount if you’re subscribed for a few years, and even time on stuff like their educational license counts towards that. Super refreshing to see.
I disagree. For one, it’s unenforceable, just like outright banning it.
But AI assistance can also mean a lot of different things, from outright vibecoding through autocomplete up to only asking it to so review. It diminishes the human work in the eyes of other people, because a simple disclaimer doesn’t distinguish between the work done, and also encourages people to point out to AI as a scapegoat for their mistakes.
Good code always was and should always be one where a human is fully responsible for it; if you decide to vibecode and happens to end up with perfect code, good; if you write it fully yourself but it’s crap it doesn’t absolve you that you didn’t use AI…
It’s a tool, so use it responsibly like any other tool and stand behind your code no matter what tools you used.