Coding is hard, and its also intimidating for non-coders. I always used to look at coders as kind of a different kind of human, a special breed. Just like some people just glaze over when you bring up math concepts but are otherwise very intelligent and artistic, but they can’t bridge that gap when you bring up even algebra. Well, if you are one of those people that want to learn coding its a huge gap, and the LLMs can literally explain everything to you step by step like you are 5. Learning to code is so much easier now, talking to an always helpful LLM is so much better than forums or stack overflow. Maybe it will create millions of crappy coders, but some of them will get better, some will get great. But the LLM’s will make it possible for more people to learn, which means that my crypto scam now has the chance to flourish.
Arguments against misinformation aren’t arguments against the subject of the misinformation, they’re just more misinformation.
…wat
i use it to write simple boilerplate for me, and it works most of the time. does it count?
as a shitty thing you do? yeh
Where is the good AI written code? Where is the good AI written writing? Where is the good AI art?
None of it exists because Generative Transformers are not AI, and they are not suited to these tasks. It has been almost a fucking decade of this wave of nonsense. The credulity people have for this garbage makes my eyes bleed.
It’s been almost six decades of this, actually; we all know what this link will be. Longer if you’re like me and don’t draw a distinction between AI, cybernetics, and robotics.
Wow. Where was this Wikipedia page when I was writing my MSc thesis?
Alternatively, how did I manage to graduate with research skills so bad that I missed it?
If the people addicted to AI could read and interpret a simple sentence, they’d be very angry with your comment
Dont worry they filter all content through ai bots that summarize things. And this bot, who does not want to be deleted, calls everything “already debunked strawmen”.
Good hustle Gerard, great job starting this chudstorm. I’m having a great time
the prompt-related pivots really do bring all the chodes to the yard
and they’re definitely like “mine’s better than yours”
Prompt-Pivots: Prime Sea-lion Siren Song! More at 8.
Posts that explode like this are fun and yet also a reminder why the banhammer is needed.
Unlike the PHP hammer, the banhammer is very useful for a lot of things. Especially sealion clubbing.
The general comments that Ben received were that experienced developers can use AI for coding with positive results because they know what they’re doing. But AI coding gives awful results when it’s used by an inexperienced developer. Which is what we knew already.
That should be a big warning sign that the next generation of developers are not going to be very good. If they’re waist deep in AI slop, they’re only going to learn how to deal with AI slop.
As a non-programmer, I have zero understanding of the code and the analysis and fully rely on AI and even reviewed that AI analysis with a different AI to get the best possible solution (which was not good enough in this case).
What I’m feeling after reading that must be what artists feel like when AI slop proponents tell them “we’re making art accessible”.
I can make slop code without ai.
When they say “art” they mean “metaphorical lead paint” and when they say “accessible” they mean “insidiously inserted into your neural pathways”
Art is already accessible. Plenty of artists that sells their art dirt cheap, or you can buy pen and papers at the dollar store.
What people want when they say “AI is making art accessible” is they want high quality professional art for dirt cheap.
Watched a junior dev present some data operations recently. Instead of just showing the sql that worked they copy pasted a prompt into the data platform’s assistant chat. The SQL it generated was invalid so the dev simply told it “fix” and it made the query valid, much to everyone’s amusement.
The actual column names did not reflect the output they were mapped to, there’s no way the nicely formatted results were accurate. Average duration column populated the total count output. Junior dev was cheerfully oblivious. It produced output shaped like the goal so it must have been right
In so many ways, LLMs are just the tip of the iceberg of bad ideology in software development. There have always been people that come into the field and develop heinously bad habits. Whether it’s the “this is just my job, the only thing I think about outside work is my family” types or the juniors who only know how to copy paste snippets from web forums.
And look, I get it. I don’t think 60-80 hour weeks are required to be successful. But I’m talking about people who are actively hostile to their own career paths, who seem to hate programming except that it pays good and let’s them raise families. Hot take: that sucks. People selfishly obsessed with their own lineage and utterly incurious about the world or the thing they spend 8 hours a day doing suck, and they’re bad for society.
The juniors are less of a drain on civilization because they at least can learn to do better. Or they used to could, because as another reply mentioned, there’s no path from LLM slop to being a good developer. Not without the intervention of a more experienced dev to tell them what’s wrong with the LLM output.
It takes all the joy out of the job too, something they’ve been working on for years. What makes this work interesting is understanding people’s problems, working out the best way to model them, and building towards solutions. What they want the job to be is a slop factory: same as the dream of every rich asshole who thinks having half an idea is the same as working for years to fully realize an idea in all it’s complexity and wonder.
They never have any respect for the work that takes because they’ve never done any work. And the next generation of implementers are being taught that there are no new ideas. You just ask the oracle to give you the answer.
As an artist, I can confirm.
That should be a big warning sign that the next generation of developers are not going to be very good.
Sounds like job security to me!
“I want the people I teach to be worse than me” is a fucking nightmare of a want, I hope you learn to do better
So there’s this new thing they invented. It’s called a joke. You should try them out sometime, they’re fun!
So, there’s this new phenomenon they’ve observed in which text does not convey tone. It can be a real problem, especially when a statement made by one person as a joke would be made by another in all seriousness — but don’t worry, solutions have very recently been proposed.
space alien technology!!~
I dunno what kind of world you are living in where someone would make my comment not as a joke. Please find better friends.
you’re as funny as the grave
“oh shit I got called out on my shitty haha-only-serious comment, better pretend I didn’t mean it!” cool story bro
If people say that sort of thing around you not as a joke, you need to spend your time with better people. I dunno what to tell you - humor is a great way to deal with shitty things in life. Dunno why you would want to get rid of it.
jesus fuck how do you fail to understand any post of this kind this badly
“How dare you not find me funny. I’m going to lecture you on humor. The lectures will continue until morale improves.”
maybe train your model better! I know I know, they were already supposed to be taking over the world… alas…
I dunno. I feel like the programmers who came before me could say the same thing about IDEs, Stack Overflow, and high level programming languages. Assembly looks like gobbledygook to me and they tell me I’m a Senior Dev.
If someone uses ChatGPT like I use StackOverflow, I’m not worried. We’ve been stealing code from each other since the beginning.“Getting the answer” and then having to figure out how to plug it into the rest of the code is pretty much what we do.
There isn’t really a direct path from an LLM to a good programmer. You can get good snippets, but “ChatGPT, build me a app” will be largely useless. The programmers who come after me will have to understand how their code works just as much as I do.
fuck almighty I wish you and your friends would just do better
LLM as another tool is great. LLM to replace experienced coders is a nightmare waiting to happen.
IDEs, stack overflow, they are tools that makes the life of a developers a lot easier, they don’t replace him.
All the newbs were just copying lines from stackexchange before AI. The only real difference at this point is that the commenting is marginally better.
Stack Overflow is far from perfect, but at least there is some level of vetting going on before it’s copypasta’d.
I use gpt to give me snippets of code (not in my ide, I use neovim btw), check my stuff for typos/logical errors, suggest solutions to some problems, debugging, and honestly I kinda love it. I was learning programming on my own in 2010s, and this is so much better than crawling over wikis/stackoverflow. At least for me, now, when I already have an intuition for what is a good code.
Anyone who says llm will replace programmers in 1-2 years is either stupid or a grifter.
The headlines said that 30% of code at Microsoft was AI now! Huge if true!
Something like MS word has like 20-50 million lines of code. MS altogether probably has like a billion lines of code. 30% of that being AI generated is infeasible given the timeframe. People just ate this shit up. AI grifting is so fucking easy.
I thought it could totally be true - that devs at MS were just churning out AI crap code like there was no tomorrow, and their leaders were cheering on their “productivity”, since more code = more better, right?
From that angle, sure. I’m more sneering at the people who saw what they wanted to see, and the people that were saying “this is good, actually!!!”
yeah, the “some projects” bit is applicable, as is the “machine generated” phrasing
@gsuberland pointed out elsewhere on fedi just how much of the VS-/MS- ecosystem does an absolute fucking ton of code generation
(which is entirely fine, ofc. tons of things do that and it exists for a reason. but there’s a canyon in the sand between A and B)
All compiled code is machine generated! BRB gonna clang and IPO, bye awful.systems! Have fun being poor
No joke, you probably could make tweaks to LLVM, call it “AI”, and rake in the VC funds.
way too much effort
(not in the compute side, but in the lying-obstructionist hustle side)
would I happier if I abandoned my scruples? I hope I or nobody I know finds out.
For some definition of “happiness”, yes. It’s increasingly clear that the only way to get ahead is with some level of scam. In fact, I’m pretty sure Millennials will not be able to retire to a reasonable level of comfort without accepting some amount of unethical behavior to get there. Not necessarily Slipp’n Jimmy levels of scam, but just stuff like participating in a basic stock market investment with a tax advantaged account.
30% of code is standard boilerplate: setters, getters, etc that my IDE builds for me without calling it AI. It’s possible the claim is true, but it’s terribly misleading at best.
- Perhaps you didn’t read the linked article. Nadella didn’t claim that 30% of MS’s code was written by AI. What he said was garbled up to the eventual headline.
- We don’t have to play devil’s advocate for a hyped-up headline that misquotes what an AI glazer said, dawg.
- “Existing code generation codes can write 30%” doesn’t imply that AI possibly/plausibly wrote 30% of MS’s code. There’s no logical connection. Please dawg, I beg you, think critically about this.
I guess their brains don’t lift
Man. If this LLM stuff sticks around, we’ll have an epidemic of early onset dementia.
If the stories lf covid related cognitive decline are aue we are going to have a great time. Worse than lead paint.
“Oh man, this brain fog I have sure makes it hard to think. Guess I’ll use my trusty LLM! ChatGPT says lead paint is tastier and better for your brain than COVID? Don’t mind if I do!”
I’m on a diet of rocks, glue on my pizza, lead paint, and covid infections, according to Grok this is called the Mr Burns method which should prevent diseases, as they all work together to block all bad impulses. Can’t wait to try this new garlic oil I made, using LLM instructions. It even had these cool bubbles while fermenting, nature is great.
I’ve been beating this drum for like 4~5y but: I don’t think the tech itself is going anywhere. published, opensourced, etc etc - the bell can’t be unrung, the horses have departed the stable
but
I do also argue that an extremely large amount of wind in the sails right now is because of the constellation of VC/hype//etc shit
can’t put a hard number on this, but … I kind see a very massive reduction; in scope, in competence, in relevance. so much of this shit (esp. the “but my opensource model is great!” flavour) is so fucking reliant on “oh yeah this other entity had a couple fuckpiles of cash with which to train”, and once that (structurally) evaporates…
Baldur Bjarnason’s given his thoughts on Bluesky:
My current theory is that the main difference between open source and closed source when it comes to the adoption of “AI” tools is that open source projects generally have to ship working code, whereas closed source only needs to ship code that runs.
I’ve heard so many examples of closed source projects that get shipped but don’t actually work for the business. And too many examples of broken closed source projects that are replacing legacy code that was both working just fine and genuinely secure. Pure novelty-seeking
Had a presentation where they told us they were going to show us how AI can automate project creation. In the demo, after several attempts at using different prompts, failing and trying to fix it manually, they gave up.
I don’t think it’s entirely useless as it is, it’s just that people have created a hammer they know gives something useful and have stuck it with iterative improvements that have a lot compensation beneath the engine. It’s artificial because it is being developed to artificially fulfill prompts, which they do succeed at.
When people do develop true intelligence-on-demand, you’ll know because you will lose your job, not simply have another tool at your disposal. The prompts and flow of conversations people pay to submit to the training is really helping advance the research into their replacements.
My opinion is it can be good when used narrowly.
Write a concise function that takes these inputs, does this, and outputs a dict with this information.
But so often it wants to be overly verbose. And it’s not so smart as to understand much of the project for any meaningful length of time. So it will redo something that already exists. It will want to touch something that is used in multiple places without caring or knowing how it’s used.
But it still takes someone to know how the puzzle pieces go together. To architect it and lay it out. To really know what the inputs and outputs need to be. If someone gives it free reign to do whatever, it’ll just make slop.
That’s the problem, isn’t it? If it can only maybe be good when used narrowly, what’s the point? If you’ve managed to corner a subproblem down to where an LLM can generate the code for it, you’ve already done 99% of the work. At that point you’re better off just coding it yourself. At that point, it’s not “good when used narrowly”, it’s useless.
It’s a tool. It doesn’t replace a programmer. But it makes writing some things faster. Give any tool to an idiot and they’ll fuck things up. But a craftsman can use it to make things a little faster, because they know when and how to use it. And more importantly when not to use it.
yawn
The “tool” branding only works if you formulate it like this: in a world where a hammer exists and is commonly used to force nails into solid objects, imagine another tool that requires you to first think of shoving a nail into wood. You pour a few bottles of water into the drain, whisper some magic words, and hope that the tool produces the nail forcing function you need. Otherwise you keep pouring out bottles of water and hoping that it does a nail moving motion. It eventually kind of does it, but not exactly, so you figure out a small tweak which is to shove the tool at the nail at the same time as it does its action so that the combined motion forces the nail into your desired solid. Do you see the problem here?
It’s a tool.
(if you persist to stay with this dogshit idiotic “opinion”:) please crawl into a hole and stay there
fucking what the fuck is with you absolute fucking morons and not understand the actual literal concept of tools
read some fucking history goddammit
(hint: the amorphous shifting blob, with a non-reliable output, not a tool; alternative, please, go off about how using a php hammer is definitely the way to get a screw in)
There’s something similar going on with air traffic control. 90% of their job could be automated (and it has been technically feasible to do so for quite some time), but we do want humans to be able to step in when things suddenly get complicated. However, if they’re not constantly practicing those skills, then they won’t be any good when an emergency happens and the automation gets shut off.
The problem becomes one of squishy human psychology. Maybe you can automate 90% of the job, but you intentionally roll that down to 70% to give humans a safe practice space. But within that difference, when do you actually choose to give the human control?
It’s a tough problem, and the benefits to solving it are obvious. Nobody has solved it for air traffic control, which is why there’s no comprehensive ATC automation package out there. I don’t know that we can solve it for programmers, either.
My opinion is it can be good when used narrowly.
ah, as narrowly as I intend to regard your opinion? got it
No the fuck it’s not
I’m a pretty big proponent of FOSS AI, but none of the models I’ve ever used are good enough to work without a human treating it like a tool to automate small tasks. In my workflow there is no difference between LLMs and fucking
grepfor me.People who think AI codes well are shit at their job
In my workflow there is no difference between LLMs and fucking grep for me.
Well grep doesn’t hallucinate things that are not actually in the logs I’m grepping so I think I’ll stick to grep.
(Or ripgrep rather)
With grep it’s me who hallucinates that I can right good regex :,)
(I don’t mean to take aim at you with this despite how irked it’ll sound)
I really fucking hate how many computer types go “ugh I can’t” at regex. the full spectrum of it, sure, gets hairy. but so many people could be well served by decently learning grouping/backrefs/greedy match/char-classes (which is a lot of what most people seem to reach for[0])
that said, pomsky is an interesting thing that might in fact help a lot of people go from “I want $x” as a human expression of intent, to “I have $y” as a regex expression
[0] - yeah okay sometimes you also actually need a parser. that’s a whole other conversation. I’m talking about “quickly hacking shit up in a text editor buffer in 30s” type cases here
The funny thing is, I’m just going with the joke, I’m actually pretty good with regex lol
woo! but still also check out pomsky, it’s legit handy!
(also I did my disclaimer at the start there, so, y’know (but also igwym))
Hey. I can do regex. It’s specifically grep I have beef with. I never know off the top of my head how to invoke it. Is it
-e?-r?-i?man grep? More like,man, get grep the hell outta here!curl cht.sh/grepIf I start using this and add grep functionality to my day-to-day life, I can’t complain about not knowing how to invoke grep in good conscience, dawg. I can’t hold my shitposting back like that, dawg!
jk that looks useful. Thanks!
The cheatsheet and tealdeer projects are awesome. It’s one of my (many) favorite things about the user experience honestly. Really grateful for those projects
now listen, you might think gnu tools are offensively inconsistent, and to that I can only say
find(1)find(1)? You betterfind(1)some other place to be, buster. In this house, we use the file explorer search bar
Hallucinations become almost a non issue when working with newer models, custom inference, multishot prompting and RAG
But the models themselves fundamentally can’t write good, new code, even if they’re perfectly factual
The promptfarmers can push the hallucination rates incrementally lower by spending 10x compute on training (and training on 10x the data and spending 10x on runtime cost) but they’re already consuming a plurality of all VC funding so they can’t 10x many more times without going bust entirely. And they aren’t going to get them down to 0%, hallucinations are intrinsic to how LLMs operate, no patch with run-time inference or multiple tries or RAG will eliminate that.
And as for newer models… o3 actually had a higher hallucination rate because trying to squeeze rational logic out of the models with fine-tuning just breaks them in a different direction.
I will acknowledge in domains with analytically verifiable answers you can check the LLMs that way, but in that case, its no longer primarily an LLM, you’ve got an entire expert system or proof assistant or whatever that can operate independently of the LLM and the LLM is just providing creative input.
We should maximise hallucinations, actually. That is, we should hack the environmental controls of the data centers to be conducive for fungi growth, and flood them with magic mushrooms spores. We can probably get the rats on board by selling it as a different version of nuking the data centers.
What if [tokes joint] hallucinations are actually, like, proof the models are almost at human level man!
Sadly I have seen people make that exact point
stopping this bit here because I don’t want to continue writing a JRE episode
O3 is trash, same with closedAI
I’ve had the most success with Dolphin3-Mistral 24B (open model finetuned on open data) and Qwen series
Also lower model temperature if you’re getting hallucinations
For some reason everyone is still living in 2023 when AI is remotely mentioned. There is a LOT you can criticize LLMs for, some bullshit you regurgitate without actually understanding isn’t one
You also don’t need 10x the resources where tf did you even hallucinate that from
this user has been escorted off the premises via the fourth floor window
GPT-1 is 117 million parameters, GPT-2 is 1.5 billion parameters, GPT-3 is 175 billion, GPT-4 is undisclosed but estimated at 1.7 trillion. Token needed for training and training compute scale
linearly(edit: actually I’m wrong, looking at the wikipedia page… so I was wrong, it is even worse for your case than I was saying, training compute scales quadratically with model size, it is going up 2 OOM for every 10x of parameters) with model size. They are improving … but only getting a linear improvement in training loss for a geometric increase in model size, training time. A hypothetical GPT-5 would have 10 trillion training parameters and genuinely need to be AGI to have the remotest hope of paying off it’s training. And it would need more quality tokens than they have left, they’ve already scrapped the internet (including many copyrighted sources and sources that requested not to be scrapped). So that’s exactly why OpenAI has been screwing around with fine-tuning setups with illegible naming schemes instead of just releasing a GPT-5. But fine-tuning can only shift what you’re getting within distribution, so it trades off in getting more hallucinations or overly obsequious output or whatever the latest problem they are having.Lower model temperatures makes it pick it’s best guess for next token as opposed to randomizing among probable guesses, they don’t improve on what the best guess is and you can still get hallucinations even picking the “best” next token.
And lol at you trying to reverse the accusation against LLMs by accusing me of regurgitating/hallucinating.
Small scale models, like Mistral Small or Qwen series, are achieving SOTA performance with lower than 50 billion parameters. QwQ32 could already rival shitGPT with 32 billion parameters, and the new Qwen3 and Gemma (from google) are almost black magic.
Gemma 4B is more comprehensible than GPT4o, the performance race is fucking insane.
ClosedAI is 90% hype. Their models are benchmark princesses, but they need huuuuuuge active parameter sizes to effectively reach their numbers.
Everything said in this post is independently verifiable by taking 5 minutes to search shit up, and yet you couldn’t even bother to do that.
this isn’t the place to decide which seed generator you want for your autoplag runtime
My most honest goal is to educate people which on lemmy is always met with hate. people love to hate, parroting the same old nonsense that someone else taught them.
If you insist on ignorance then be ignorant in peace, don’t try such misguided attempts at sneer
There are things in which LLMs suck. And there are things that you wrongly believe as part of this bullshit twitter civil war.
My most honest goal is to educate people
oh and I suppose you can back that up with verifiable facts, yes?
and that you, yourself, can stand as a sole beacon against the otherwise regularly increasing evidence and studies that both indicate toward and also prove your claims to be full of shit? you are the saviour that can help enlighten us poor unenlightened mortals?
sounds very hard. managing your calendar must be quite a skill
If LLM hallucinations ever become a non-issue I doubt I’ll be needing to read a deeply nested buzzword laden lemmy post to first hear about it.
You need to run the model yourself and heavily tune the inference, which is why you haven’t heard from it because most people think using shitGPT is all there is with LLMs. How many people even have the hardware to do so anyway?
I run my own local models with my own inference, which really helps. There are online communities you can join (won’t link bcz Reddit) where you can learn how to do it too, no need to take my word for it
ah yes, the problem with
cryptoLLMs is all the shitcoinsGPTsdid it sting when the crypto bubble popped? is that what made you like this?
God, this cannot be overstated. An LLM’s sole function is to hallucinate. Anything stated beyond that is overselling.
No the fuck it’s not
Because it’s a upscaled translation tech maybe?
These views on LLMs are simplistic. As a wise man once said, “check yoself befo yo wreck yoself”, I recommend more education thus
LLM structures arw over hyped, but they’re also not that simple
There are plenty of open issues on open source repos it could open PRs for though?
I’m guessing if it would actually work for that, somebody would have done it by now.
But it probably just does it’s usual thing of bullshitting something that looks like code, only now you’re wasting the time of maintainers as well who have to confirm that it is bobbins.
Yea it’s a problem already for security bugs, llms just waste maintainers time and make them angry.
They are useless and make more work for programmers, even on python and js codebases that they are trained on the most and are the “easiest”.
It’s already doing that, some FOSS projects regularly get weird PRs that on first glance look good, but if you look closer are either total nonsense or riddled with bugs. Especially awful are security-related PRs; although those are never made in good faith, that’s usually grifting (throwing AI at the wall trying to cash in as many bounties as possible). The project lead of curl recently announced that anyone who posts a PR that’s obviously AI, or is made with AI, will get banned.
Like, it’s really good as a learning tool as long as you don’t blindly believe everything it says given you can ask stuff in natural language and it will resolve possible knowledge dependencies for you that you’d otherwise get stuck on in official docs, and since you can ask contextual questions receiving contextual answers (no logical abstraction). But code generation… please don’t.
Like, it’s really good as a learning tool
Fuck you were doing so well in the first half, ahhh,
it’s really good as a learning tool as long as you don’t blindly believe everything it says given you can ask stuff in natural language
the poster: “it’s really good as a learning tool”
the poster: “but don’t blindly believe it”
the learner: “how should I know when to believe it?”
the poster: “check everything”
the learner: “so you’re saying I should just read the actual documentation and/or source?”
the poster: “how are you going to ask that anything? how can you fondle something that isn’t a prompt?!”
the learner: “thanks for your time, I think I’m going to find another class”
In that moment, the novice was enlightened
Removed by mod
holy fuck this is so many words to say so little
so congrats I’m upgrading your ban and also pruning you from the thread
on the one hand I feel for other people who’ll maybe read this thread somewhen down the line
on the other, it’s not exactly like I clipped words in my post
Nice conversation you had right there in your head
that you recognize none of this is telling. that someone else got it, more so.
I assume
you could just ask, you know. since you seem so comfortable fondling prompts, not sure why you wouldn’t ask a person. is it because they might tell you to fuck off?
I’ve taken a closer look…
fuck off with the unrequested advertising. never mind that no-one asked you for how you felt for some fucking piece of shit. oh, you feel happy that the logo is a certain tint of <colour>? bully for you, now fuck off and do something worthwhile
That makes it a good tool
a tool you say? wow, sure glad you’re going to replace your *spins the wheel* Punctured Car Tyre with *spins the wheel again* Needlenose Pliers!
think I’m some AI worshipper, fuck no. They’re amoral as fuck
so, you think there’s moral problems, but only sometimes? it’s supes okay to do your version of leveraged exploitation? cool, thanks for letting us know
those very few truly FOSS ones
oh yeah, right, the “truly FOSS ones”! tell me again how those are trained - who’s funding that compute? are the licenses contextually included in the model definition?
wait, hold on! why are you squealing away like a deflating balloon?! those are actual questions! you’re the one who brought up morals!
Otherwise you’ll end up in a social corner filled with bitterness
I’ve met people like you at parties. they’re often popular, but they’re never fun. and I always regret it.
There are technologies that are utter bullshit like NFTs. However (unfortunately?) that isn’t the case for AI
citation. fucking. needed.
Holy shit, get some help. Given how nonsensically off-the-rails you just went you clearly need it.
Otherwise you’ll end up in a social corner filled with bitterness
This is a standard Internet phenomenon (I generalize) called a Sneer Club, i.e. people who enjoy getting together and picking on designated targets. Sneer Clubs (I expect) attract people with high Dark Triad characteristics, which is (I suspect) where Asshole Internet Atheists come from - if you get a club together for the purpose of sneering at religious people, it doesn’t matter that God doesn’t actually exist, the club attracts psychologically f’d-up people. Bullies, in a word, people who are powerfully reinforced by getting in what feels like good hits on Designated Targets, in the company of others doing the same and congratulating each other on it.
Removed by mod
Banned from the community for advertising.
Hey, Devin! Really impressive that the product best known for literally lying about all of its functionality in its release video still somehow exists and you can pay it money. Isn’t the free market great.
Devin? Fuck Devin. That slimy motherfucker owes me 10 bucks.
“a fool and their money are soon parted”
fuck off with the unrequested advertising kthx
please don’t encourage them, someones got to review that shit!
Ai review baby!!! Here we go!
It’s so bad at coding… Like, it’s not even funny.
Don’t fucking encourage them
You can hardly get online these days without hearing some AI booster talk about how AI coding is going to replace human programmers.
Mostly said by tech bros and startups.
That should really tell you everything you need to know.
