I don’t trust SaaS ones not because I don’t think they’re not doing all due diligence, but because a SaaS password manager is the juiciest of juicy targets and eventually someone will succeed in cracking one.

I personally use KeepassXC, which is a local password manager. Most of the benefits of a SaaS one with some extra work handling sync and backup yourself.

Oh no… anyway

What you’re looking for is the history of “computer vision”

Like most things, there isn’t an a/b divide but a spectrum between the two, and in this case it’s even more complicated because a society could take a collectivist view about one thing and an individualist view about others.

Work culture all over the world regardless of culture is fucked up.

Weird how you say collectivist like it’s a bad thing

familiar with the code base

Call me crazy but I think developers should understand what they’re working on, and using LLM tools doesn’t provide a shortcut there.

Huh? I’m definitely not hyping AI. If anything it would be the opposite. We’re also literally in the comment section for an a study about AI productivity which is the first remotely reputable study I’ve even seen. The rest have been rigged marketing stunts. As far as judging my opinion about the productivity of AI against junior developers against studies, why don’t you bring me one that isn’t “we made an artificial test then directly trained our LLM on the questions so it will look good for investors”? I’ll wait.

You’re acting like this is a gotcha when it’s actually probably the most rigorous study of AI tool productivity change to date.

That said, this year’s crop of interns at work seem to be thin wrappers on top of LLMs and I worry about the future of critical thinking for society at large.

This is the must frustrating problem I have. With a few exceptions, LLM use seems to be inversely proportional to skill level, and having someone tell me “chatgpt said ___” when asking me for help because clearly chatgpt is not doing it for their problem makes me want to just hang up.

I would say that “replacing with AI assistance” is probably not what is actually happening. Is it economic factors reducing hiring. This isn’t the first time it has happened and it won’t be the last. The AI boosters are just claiming responsibility for marketing purposes.

Now, as for AI, it’s currently as good or “better” than about 40% of brand-new fresh from the BS program software engineers I have worked with. A year ago that number probably would have been 20%. So far it’s improving relatively quickly. The question is: will it plateau, or will it improve exponentially?

LOL sure

It is based on my experience, which I trust immeasurably more than rigged “studies” done by the big LLM companies with clear conflict of interest.

The point is that comparing AI tools to junior engineers is ridiculous in the first place. It is simply marketing.

People specifically hate having tools they find more frustrating than useful shoved down their throat, having the internet filled with generative ai slop, and melting glaciers in the context of climate change.

This is all specifically directed at LLMs in their current state and will have absolutely zero effect on any research funding. Additionally, openAI etc would be losing less money if they weren’t selling (at a massive loss) the hot garbage they’re selling now and focused on research.

As far as worker protections, what we need actually has nothing to do with AI in the first place and has everything to do with workers/society at large being entitled to the benefits of increased productivity that has been vacuumed up by greedy capitalists for decades.

AI tools are way less useful than a junior engineer, and they aren’t an investment that turns into a senior engineer either.

Fun how the article concludes that AI tools are still good anyway, actually.

This AI hype is a sickness

Rather than writing something from scratch it would make more sense to maintain an existing application stewarded by the university. There are some universities that work this way but even then they don’t have enough projects for everyone to work on

Lol this is ridiculous.

1. Small changes across many people add up. IE meatless Monday has a positive effect even though it’s not full abstinence.
2. If someone truly can’t economically afford to change their eating habits I’m not talking about them. You’re extrapolating to them in order to make a bad faith argument against anyone making any positive change. (Though beans and rice is cheaper than beef lol)
3. Corporate America, while it can’t be controlled exclusively by people’s habits, actually is able to be influenced by enough people’s spending habits. It has to make money after all.

Have fun completely abdicating your agency and making absurd rants though, I guess

P.S. no one argues that people should make personal changes in lieu of government/business changes. This is another bad faith assertion people make to attempt to abdicate personal responsibility.

How dare you ask people to change literally any habit they have! It’s obviously someone else’s responsibility to change!