I disagree with the premise. Never blindly trust a piece of code, document or statement written by a human or AI.
You weren’t reviewing properly before. You were slack. You let problems through. Now you have to review properly and oh no it’s slower than just clicking approve
I think you mean billionaire. You need to be a multi millionaire to own a house here lol
Hahaha either we work at the same place or it’s identical across the industry
Machines cannot take responsibility for problems, which is why I feel containment barriers cannot be entirely AI. AI reviews are fine (and catch a lot of wild issues humans miss) if a human genuinely reviews it too
I’ve lost count of how many snippets I’ve reviewed that were verbatim pasted from stack overflow pre-AI lol
My view is that humans produce a lot of garbage, and AI tooling currently amplifies your productivity. If you’re careless, don’t take pride and normally commit tech debt then with AI tooling that’s going to be amplified 10-100x. The more careless you are the faster you can commit more garbage - especially if you’re skipping on unit/integration/functional testing
Again, cowboys have been skipping steps and doing things lazily and poorly well before AI. Everyone knows people who jump straight into an IDE instead of following proper workflows. Yes, skills you don’t practice take a hit. In a professional setting there is such a substantial productivity hit to avoid all AI use, compared to correct and proper use. It will soon be infeasible to take such at anti AI stance and remain in the industry
The lazy part is not questioning the bullshit they noticed and did nothing about - not using the tool
So now technology news is gossip headlines?
These models tested are so old they’re from the era where they couldn’t pass a math test or count letters in words
Discussions about potential bans are supposed to remain open for at least 72 hours. While consensus that Sanger had violated Wikipedia policies was clear, Sanger was banned at some point before that deadline. He was then briefly unbanned, and then again indefinitely banned once 72 hours had elapsed and the discussion about the ban closed.
There is clearly some extreme bias on Wikipedia when they can’t even follow this very normal and regularly practised rule
Isn’t Amazon shopping run at a loss, subsidised by AWS?
This isn’t new at all, even the cell nucleus number multiplies
Probably some proprietary interface the NAS provider set up
You need root to bind to the first thousand ports, is it possible your container station is running as root or something to that effect? Does it work correctly when the port number is some other large number like 8921?
Anthropic’s opus 4.8 is well beyond a junior dev. Most of the time it outperforms senior devs. Then there’s mythos we don’t have access to yet. We’re fucked. Even if human R&D stops now
Should and needs to be are different things
There is generally no such consent required in public in most countries
Not even a service?
Even if the energy came from 100% black coal, EVs still have less emissions than ICE
In article it says the probrem was staff resignations, not AI. They brought them back with more money to set up the AI systems.