For a while I have been thinking that all this nonsense about AI world domination and lousy safe guards on grok enabling people to do indecent stuff is just a way for fastforwarding us into passing regulations for hardware gated LLMs so that people can't use open models too easily. After all, introducing bugs will shoot them in their own foot if open models surpass them.

As for shitty code, I think the more unmaintainable it is the better for them because then you rely on their services to maintain the code and eventually they might quite substantially ramp up prices provided open LLMs remain underdeveloped or hard to access.

New conspiracy theory: all the bugs and shitty code generated by LLMs are actually corporate safeguards to ensure you don't create actually working competing products

Bullshitting is an art, I guess

Thanks for that, very useful point promoting interesting discussions.

I fed your post to my LLM and it said to wash dishes by hand since it's more thorough.

Is a dishwasher a tool for washing dishes or automation of dish washing? If it's a tool then I don't see how LLMs aren't, in both cases you do some set up, tell it to go, and inspect the result for if its acceptable. If its automation then it shows that automation can be a good thing when done well and the moral panic around it is just "its bad when the thing I like as an educated person is automated".

You can always design them and then ask you loyal fans for one. At least, that's how crackers seen to do it. 😉

sure to make users find an alternative to macroslop to give their money to to lick to the center of the slopsie roll.

This is where I'd make all sorts of amazing accessories as an award-winning 3D modeler and designer...

IF I HAD A STEAM FRAME!

I'm probably in the 2027 camp 😭

What?

Maybe it’s pedantic, but he’s narrowly right. Cooking and drive-thrus are different.

If you say you want to be fed and both achieve that end, that’s true. But the metaphor is apt since drive-thrus give you junk food the way LLMs give you junk software and leave you feeling bad and wondering what went into it.

Cooking for yourself gives you better control over the inputs and process.

I'm not sure I agree with this

A drive-thru is not a tool for cooking, it is automation for avoiding cooking. LLMs are not tools with which you write code - they are automation with which you avoid writing code

Is a microwave automation? What about ovens with timers? Do I need to know how to use a frying pan to know cooking?

Are you actually writing code if you use compilers instead of assembly? Do you need to know the output of your compiler to know coding? LLMs cannot replace understanding code the same way compilers cannot replace understanding assembly, but both of them are layers of abstraction that both make dubious guesses about what you actually want in their output.

You should still learn how to write code AND assembly btw, but I disagree with this guy's definition of tool

I get that people are complaining about bugs, but its still quite an achievement to decompile to commented source with meaningful function names and variables, and just be able to recompile.

It turns out this is not what author claims to have done. Recreation from scratch is the claim. https://github.com/storytold/photocraft

Age of decompiling to reasonably named functions is here though. https://github.com/morluto/rea . Which is what I assumed was used to clone.

I'm not getting over it.
You're just going to have to accept that fact and get over it.

pentiumpunk amish, making your own chips in a shed with a quartz tube furnace

Sadly they mean free as in gratis for the most part (other than Blender and Krita).

I played around with it a little. Seems pretty great for 2D CAD although I don't have much experience in that. This program is ancient by modern standards.

What I am really interested in is them making a clone of Inventor or Fusion360. That will be huge for anyone who owns a 3D printer.

Oh, he already has AutoCad, called cadcraft.

Feel free to try it out and let me know how well it works.

Also I disagree with that label. I'm taking the radical position that... it's probably fine. It largely works, and people can do stuff with it. Staying mad about it is poorly justified and bad for your health. It's just a chatbot. Make your peace.

Meanwhile the insistence that 'AI [thing] isn't [thing]!' gets shakier and fuzzier, but no less loudly confident. An AI cartoon isn't a drawing, sure. But it is an image conveying someone's idea. AI music is still a song, by any definition. It's usually well within western music theory. AI reverse engineering has demonstrably produced byte-for-byte identical results, and some folks still insist it doesn't count, somehow. What is anyone supposed to say to that? It's an absurd denial framed like philosophy. A counter-poke and saying 'relax' do not make someone a delusional cultist.

You have to be able to understand disagreement in terms besides an opposite extreme.

I dug up dirt with my hands and filtered it into clay and made a little bowl.

ai can absolutely get fucked.

Legally it isn't, actually. Morally, yes.

Check out "AI has a labor issue, not a copyright issue" chapter of "The Reverse Centaur's Guide to Life After AI" by Cory Doctorow

It's a hard chapter to read, but it's important to understand.

EDIT: I love the downvotes for speaking the truth, seriously people, please understand. It's important.

"'AI' is not a tool"... the people who use LLMs are.

6 commits, every one with Claude...

The Craft Suite clone of Adobe might change this entirely since it's free on GitHub (for now, I'm sure take downs are coming).