| > So why wouldn't I shit on something I have no use for, because of all the qualities it has that deserve to be shit upon? Because shitting on something means selectively discussing only the bad aspects of that something, in an exaggerated or otherwise dishonest manner. Which you did indeed do, was my point. You confirm: > When I did use them it went great because I didn't ask for random advice on subjects. I could even get ChatGPT to oneshot code for me. A model that "keeps hallucinating all the time" will simply not be able to do this, as they would be "unusable". Even aside from that, this is also a genuine experience that you did have; if you are always just shitting on this technology, you are covering this up, misrepresenting your actual experiences regarding the subject. You're unfortunately indeed most certainly free to do this. I'm not sure how knowingly misrepresenting things like this and deceiving / instigating people is any less "ghoul-ish" in your worldview, but then I guess it is a big world out there. Like, you could maintain all of these opinions: - how the current mainstream AI companies got where they got was deeply unethical, and so is what they're trying to make happen - how the industry is pushing for adopting AI is utter rubbish and misrepresentative in and of itself - how you prefer to actually live the qualia of coding and do not enjoy an agent coding on your behalf and just not try and deceive people about the models and the agentic tooling around it. It's really not that hard, and it makes your positions both a lot more approachable and self-consistent. I don't think you appreciate when people are posturing about how AI is the best thing since sliced bread, so why do the same just in the opposite direction? Aren't you tired about the information space being a tit for tat game? I know I am. |