pythonRon

Sometimes, I skim the generated text. I mean, most of it is supposition and filler, right? The rest of the time, I cut to the chase: does the code work? If not, I ignore all the generated text, pass along the errors/warnings, and go from there. What I like best about working with AI is that I feel like a leader developer again (I've been retired from programming for almost 30 years.) It's pleasant and I don't need to worry about how snarky I get when going over bad code.

You took the words right out of my mouth. LOL

Have people been finding bugs? Having trouble with it? It does work, right? Surely, this is just bureaucratic nonsense.

The same thing happened in Canada in the 1930's, but the force behind it was neither artificial nor intelligent, just greedy.

I love how the shortcomings of the extremely wealthy are considered the failings of all humans.

This just confirms what I've suspected all my life... I should have been a plumber.

Why don't these hackers do something useful... like redistribute the contents of all the billionaires' bank accounts.

One of the first things we discussed in my first year at art college was originality. No one has an original idea these days. It's all been done many, many, many times. The only thing original is POV, but with so much media being pumped into our brains even that isn't guaranteed any longer... and that was the state of things in 1985. Now, some 40 years later, what hope does originality have?

   Art is viewed differently by those who create it, those who talk about it, and those who collect it. For an artist, art is creative and expressive, a way to 'scratch the itch,' so to speak. For those who talk about it, it's a way to show off their knowledge and passion (and maybe make a living doing so). For those who collect it, it's an ego boost and an investment, something to brag about at parties.
   When you consider programming from these three points of view, programmers are definitely capable of seeing themselves as artists. Perhaps those who talk about programming may also see programmers as artists, but does anyone still collect software? There used to be a saying... an adage, if you will... that whoever dies with the most (pirated software) wins. But that's the only context within which I've ever heard of people collecting software.
   I trained as an artist, got a degree from ECCAD, but did most of my art using computers with software such as Deluxe Paint, Sculpt-Animate 4D, Blender, Photoshop, Corel Draw, etc. I also spent many years writing software, both for a living and as a hobby.

To be honest, I have mixed feelings about using AI. On the one hand, I've given up on even understanding the nitty gritty details of code any more and feel I like I'm missing something that connected me to the process the way it used it. But on the other hand, projects that I would have set aside 10 to 12 months to write, I can now knock off in a matter of days with the help of AI. Do I have a firm POV on programming as art? Not really. I can see arguments both pro and con. But, if nothing else, the subject gives those who talk about programming fodder for many discussions to come.

If Typesafe really wants to do some good in the world, it'll raise money for those in need.

Before we come to a final conclusion on this, we need to reexamine the NOVA food classification system. It holds some rather baffling contradictions. For instance, if you buy a deep fryer and a mandolin slicer to make your own potato chips at home, they're classified as processed foods. But if you buy a bag of plain potato chips (ingredients: potatoes, oil, salt) they're classified as ultra-processed.

There's no doubt in my mind that the writer is right.

The goal is to lengthen human lifespan? Like the planet doesn't have enough humans already.

The sad thing about this is that, despite this clarification, in schools, it'll still be taught as a Watson/Crick discovery, not Franklin, just as the telephone is still taught as a Bell invention rather than something he stole while working at the patent office and Edison gets credit for the light bulb even though he was a johnny-come-lately. Once these things are in print, it's hard to get them changed. I remember once in school being taught something (don't remember what it was) and sticking my hand up to say, "but that's not right. We now know X to be true." The teacher said, "But it's that way in the book, so that's how it'll be on your exams."