violates licenses

Not a problem if you believe all code should be free. Being cheeky but this has nothing to do with code quality, despite being true

do the thinking

This argument can be used equally well in favor of AI assistance, and it’s already covered by my previous reply

non-deterministic

It’s deterministic

brainstorming

This is not what a “good developer” uses it for

We have substantially similar opinions, actually. I agree on your points of good developers having a clear grasp over all of their code, ethical issues around AI (not least of which are licensing issues), skill loss, hardware prices, etc.

However, what I have observed in practice is different from the way you describe LLM use. I have seen irresponsible use, and I have seen what I personally consider to be responsible use. Responsible use involves taking a measured and intentional approach to incorporating LLMs into your workflow. It’s a complex topic with a lot of nuance, like all engineering, but I would be happy to share some details.

Critical review is the key sticking point. Junior developers also write crappy code that requires intense scrutiny. It’s not impossible (or irresponsible) to use code written by a junior in production, for the same reason. For a “good developer,” many of the quality problems are mitigated by putting roadblocks in place to…

1. force close attention to edits as they are being written,
2. facilitate handholding and constant instruction while the model is making decisions, and
3. ensure thorough review at the time of design/writing/conclusion of the change.

When it comes to making safe and correct changes via LLM, specifically, I have seen plenty of “good developers” in real life, now, who have engineered their workflows to use AI cautiously like this.

Again, though, I share many of your concerns. I just think there’s nuance here and it’s not black and white/all or nothing.

You’re wrong, whether you figure that out now or later. Using an LLM where you gatekeep every write is something that good developers have started doing. The most senior engineers I work with are the ones who have adopted the most AI into their workflow, and with the most care. There’s a difference between vibe coding and responsible use.

Ah, okay, I understand now. Rocks are nutritious—and whisker pants.

Out of curiosity, would you explain your reply and your immediate parent’s comment for me? “Sez” - a bit old but didn’t seem too weird, but then: “date of poisoning” - are you implying an LLM wrote that and “sez” has something to do with pinpointing some poisoning of the model?

100% agree

I think we mostly agree. And I do agree that “flawed security can be worse than no security at all.” I think, though, that this doesn’t make security worse, just that it doesn’t make it that much better.

But even simple filters can make a significant difference: maybe you remember the early-ish Lemmy debacle of turning off captchas for signups by default, ostensibly because captchas are now completely defeated… which led to thousands and thousands of bot accounts being created pretty much immediately across a bunch of instances, and the feature being turned back on by default.

Both things can be true. It definitely is better for security. It’s pretty much indisputably better for security.

But you know what would be even better for security? Not allowing any third-party code at all (i.e., no apps).

Obviously that’s too shitty and everyone would move off of that platform. There’s a balance that must be struck between user freedom and the general security of a worldwide network of sensitive devices.

Users should be allowed to do insecure things with their devices as long as they are (1) informed of the risks, (2) prevented from doing those things by accident if they are not informed, and (3) as long as their actions do not threaten the rest of the network.

Side-loading is perfectly reasonable under those conditions.

I think it’s pretty obvious what the difference is between literal toddlers getting to vote (read: parents getting multiple votes) and black people/women getting to vote. I’m not arguing for meritocracy or even what the voting age should be. I’m arguing against the idea that there should be no minimum voting age.

That is just a very stupid idea. The best thing for all of us everywhere is for the most rational and well-informed people to vote. The fact that everyone gets a vote is unfortunate for all of us because that includes voters who vote against the public interest, but it is necessary for a free democracy. Children and even teenagers have simply not had enough time on this earth to make an informed decision. Even if you want to make the argument that some are informed enough, they are far, FAR fewer than in the adult populace. You do not want to broaden that window.

You mean ammonium, jsyk

The alternative being…? What, third party candidates? Are you kidding? The only alternative to “blue no matter who” is more “red” and as you can see, there is literally zero support from “red” whereas there’s at least a substantial fraction from “blue.”

I don’t think many people who said “blue no matter who” are actually very surprised by this, because the phrase is not coming from die hard supporters, it’s coming from anyone with basic logic skills.

Just started using Linkwarden, been cool so far.

Nothing is black and white. Bernie may be a geezer, but he has consistently good policy positions for his entire career, and has more integrity than the rest of the senate combined.

No, it’s obvious to anyone with a brain. If the commenter seriously thought it might have been a false positive when they read the original comment, they never would have relayed their thought the way they did in their reply, and it is so clearly a reference to the content of the post that to analyze it even that deeply is overkill. To anyone reading this who is a native English speaker: if you think that comment needs a “/s”, you need to work on your reading comprehension. Read things more carefully.

Since always, without a subpoena. Until PRISM, at least.

It should be called The Endarkenment, just saying

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. Or, at least, you’ve touched on something that is often overlooked and underemphasized, despite being a (if not the) root cause of this stuff. I think it’s hard for people to understand if they were not young men once, and it’s easy to forget as you age, even if you were.

Wow, that was a sharp turn.

But… it is a confederation. Is it not? Why wouldn’t they? Even Wikipedia mentions confederation in the first paragraph of the EU entry:

The EU has often been described as a sui generis political entity combining the characteristics of both a federation and a confederation.