Similar field, similar experience. I think it’s easy to sleep on how much LLMs can help your work if you’re just using chatbots- because those give incorrect answers so often that most interactions end up being a waste of time.
But if you give the model tools to test its answers, and prompt it in a way that restricts responses to tool outputs instead of generated answers, suddenly the many mistakes are less of a problem. It wrote a function with 5 bugs that did the wrong thing to begin with? and then it caught all of those mistakes in testing and fixed them, and it took 6 seconds, so it doesn’t really matter. Maybe that’s how I write a function in my head too, I just think through the most obvious issues before typing the code and testing it.
The high level planning still needs frequent and detailed instructions, otherwise it tends to go down the wrong rabbit holes.

Setting up the environment took some time, bit since I started using claude code I actually started to go through my tech debt backlog, because fixes that used to mean I have to take a day off, I now take 5 minutes to write down the issue and the scope of the fix, and 10 minutes to watch it being fixed. I am pretty sure I will stop writing code in a year or two maximum. I am slightly worried what happens to the codebase if prices of tokens get out of control, but I guess local models could help as long as you have the hardware.

You are not going to get a general pulse here. This is a fuck ai echo chamber. I am not saying that the sentiment is wrong, but it isn’t representative of the general public.

100%. The time I spend at a fucking gas station is the time the gas is flowing + the overhead of tapping the card. Plus, if there are ads and the mute button doesn’t instantly work, leaving a 1 star review.

Quitting smoking is achieved by not smoking. Ingesting nyquil is not part of that process.

That is, randomly mixed up statements from a few different Reddit threads completed with hallucinated info and delivered with total confidence. Perfect, if you don’t need correct information, just some text.
However, if you need information, now you either scroll through the summary and start glancing through the top results, or you start reading the summary, hover over the “sources “, guess which one may the statement actually come from, read it, and check it the source seems valid and the summary is accurate.
I’d argue that the summary is a net negative under both scenarios. It would be great to get quicker answers, if you could trust it, but because you can’t, it’s not.

This sounds nice. On iphone, nothing happens when I click your link. When I paste it in safari, it searches for it, and the ddg results are coordinates finder websites, not related to the specific location.

Ehm, Olympic and Paralympic rowing… is the plan that the race will start as Olympic and finish as Paralympic?
(Sorry)

It is outright ridiculous to say that undergraduate degrees are standard and one would get similar education out of MIT and Oklahoma State University. The professors are not the same, the facilities are not the same, and the peers are not the same. May I ask: are you making this shockingly incorrect statement after completing an undergrad degree at MIT or Stanford or similar school, and being disappointed in it?

Your example sentence simply uses the english verb “wake” in its original meaning.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wake

Not the adjective “woke” that this thread is about.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke

By 2019, the term was widely being used sarcastically as a pejorative by conservatives, as a way to disparage socially liberal movements as superficial and insincere performative activism.

I’d like to remind you that we’re in a drought, please limit your shower time.

Washing face after going outside, keeping the house clean, and using an air purifier help a bit when at home.

deleted by creator

I’m confused about why people think the guillotine is cool. Feeling entitled to lynch people who you see as the enemy is the symbol of being a psychopath, not a symbol of social justice.

Not really. But try playing a game of sliding stones on ice with some golf clubs designed for precision shots!

I didn’t read the article, but from the summary, it’s not obvious which humans wrote the stories. Famously, the ability of humans for writing is not the same for everyone. The average person writes like shit. The average writer writes kind of ok. The top few percentile of writers write really well, and the rest of humans like to read what those writers write. So if in the study, they asked a 6 year old, a plumber, and an accountant for a story, I completely understand that ai rated better. But even then, I would rather read 10 bad stories by random people than 10 passable-appearing ai stories.

It’s too late to record a baseline, so any metrics will need to work retrospectively anyway.

But these are not ideologies, they’re made up derogatory terms. It’s like asking what is the difference between a fuckwit and a dickwad.

The way I understand it, the main thing for incels is that their celibacy is involuntary. They think they’re entitled to sex, and anyone not having sex with them is to blame for their misery. So being a rapist is precisely on brand for them, sadly.

Isn’t the bible god’s perspective? It’s supposed to be his words.

Then why do you equate stress with biopsy?