Are you just trolling or do you seriously not understand how something which can do a task correctly with 30% reliability can be made useful if the result can be automatically verified.

Its not a magical 30%, factors apply. It's not even a mind that thinks and just isnt very good.

This isnt like a magical dice that gives you truth on a 5 or a 6, and lies on 1,2,3,7, and for.

This is a (very complicated very large) language or other data graph that programmatically identifies an average. 30% of the time-according to one potempkin-ass demonstration.
Which means the more possible that is, the easier it is to either use a simpler cheaper tool that will give you a better more reliable answer much faster.

And 20 tons of human shit has uses! If you know its providence, there's all sorts of population level public health surveillance you can do to get ahead of disease trends! Its also got some good agricultural stuff in it-phosphorous and stuff, if you can extract it.

Stop. Just please fucking stop glazing these NERVE-ass fascist shit-goblins.

Ok what about tech journalists who produced articles with those misunderstandings. Surely they know better yet still produce articles like this. But also people who care enough about this topic to post these articles usually I assume know better yet still spread this crap

So no different than answers from middle management I guess?

I think everyone in the universe is aware of how LLMs work by now, you don't need to explain it to someone just because they think LLMs are more useful than you do.

IDK what you mean by glazing but if by "glaze" you mean "understanding the potential threat of AI to society instead of hiding under a rock and pretending it's as useless as a plastic radio," then no, I won't stop.

The ones being implemented into emergency call centers are better though? Right?

This basically the entirety of the hype from the group of people claiming LLMs are going take over the work force. Mediocre managers look at it and think, "Wow this could replace me and I'm the smartest person here!"

Sure, Jan.

Did you make it? Or did you prompt it? They ain't quite the same.

It's absolutely dangerous but it doesnt have to work even a little to do damage; hell, it already has. Your thing just makes it sound much more capable than it is. And it is not.

Also, it's not AI.

semantics.

I won't tolerate Jan slander here. I know he's just a builder, but his life path has the most probability of having a great person out of it!

I'd say Jan Botanist is also up there as being a pretty great person.

For me as a software developer the accuracy is more in the 95%+ range.

On one hand the built in copilot chat widget in Intellij basically replaces a lot my google queries.

On the other hand it is rather fucking good at executing some rewrites that is a fucking chore to do manually, but can easily be done by copilot.

Imagine you have a script that initializes your DB with some test data. You have an Insert into statement with lots of columns and rows so

Inser into (column1,....,column n)
Values row1,
Row 2
Row n

Addig a new column with test data for each row is a PITA, but copilot handles it without issue.

Similarly when writing unit tests you do a lot of edge case testing which is a bunch of almost same looking tests with maybe one variable changing, at most you write one of those tests, then copilot will auto generate the rest after you name the next unit test, pretty good at guessing what you want to do in that test, at least with my naming scheme.

So yeah, it's way overrated for many-many things, but for programming it's a pretty awesome productivity tool.

It doesn't matter if you need a human to review. AI has no way distinguishing between success and failure. Either way a human will have to review 100% of those tasks.

Keep doing what you do. Your company will pay me handsomely to throw out all your bullshit and write working code you can trust when you're done. If your company wants to have a product in the future that is.

Ok what about tech journalists who produced articles with those misunderstandings. Surely they know better yet still produce articles like this. But also people who care enough about this topic to post these articles usually I assume know better yet still spread this crap

For me as a software developer the accuracy is more in the 95%+ range.

On one hand the built in copilot chat widget in Intellij basically replaces a lot my google queries.

On the other hand it is rather fucking good at executing some rewrites that is a fucking chore to do manually, but can easily be done by copilot.

Imagine you have a script that initializes your DB with some test data. You have an Insert into statement with lots of columns and rows so

Inser into (column1,....,column n)
Values row1,
Row 2
Row n

Addig a new column with test data for each row is a PITA, but copilot handles it without issue.

Similarly when writing unit tests you do a lot of edge case testing which is a bunch of almost same looking tests with maybe one variable changing, at most you write one of those tests, then copilot will auto generate the rest after you name the next unit test, pretty good at guessing what you want to do in that test, at least with my naming scheme.

So yeah, it's way overrated for many-many things, but for programming it's a pretty awesome productivity tool.