I agree with this except there is no way to use AI that doesn’t push a design towards being samey junk, less AI is better but this is not as much a tool with a right way and a wrong way to use it (it is that to some extent of course) and more primarily a lie being sold to people that spits out things people then believe they or the AI made when it is simply an older human idea that was stolen and thrown into a woodchipper without any consideration, material support or recognition of the human who provided the training data that was crucial.
If you want to file off the serial numbers of other human ideas and mutilate them in an LLM type device fine but don’t claim you or the AI are actually contributing anything real.
I disagree that everything AI generates is garbage, but I do agree with the “contributing anything real” comment. That might seem like it is at odds with each other, but I have a one word reason: perl.
Back in the day, I worked extensively in perl and really did believe in TIMTOWDI. The problem with TIMTOWDI is TIMTOWDI, though. Not every system I built needed to be some unique butterfly. I just needed it to function (preferably with high efficiency). Then I started working in group projects. Perl is awful outside of single-developer environment. Imagine 5 people all declaring their own best practices and refusing to compromise as it would “violate best practices” that they had just set for themselves.
There is value in NOT creating new ways to do things simply because you can. This becomes clear the first time someone approaches you about building our own security library for something. You have no idea the amount of code copied from stackoverflow that exists in production unattributed. It simply works and no one is going to care (usually not even the people posting these solutions - which includes myself).
Even outside of that, if I sat and wrote a sub() to do some recursive file handling, I don’t own that code like some intellectual property regardless how cleverly I wrote it. I combined several documented parts into a single idea. If I don’t own those parts, I don’t see how I can own the idea that was built from them.
I hate when people outside a given space with zero knowledge of that space decide that their input should be of paramount value to the people living there. Don’t really know what else to tell you on that one.
As a programmer myself, I have the most to say about this.
I hate programmers because 99% of them are touch-starved, socially-constipated nerds who think that because they can solve a hard math problem that they are smarter and better than the thousands of years of social development that came before them. And so, they sit there, smugly destroying all of it because they are—and I’m being serious—too stupid to know what they’re breaking.
You don’t know why you should own a function that composes other functions you didn’t write? I’m not even going to give you the answer. Just, see if you can figure out a way that might work.
I agree with this except there is no way to use AI that doesn’t push a design towards being samey junk, less AI is better but this is not as much a tool with a right way and a wrong way to use it (it is that to some extent of course) and more primarily a lie being sold to people that spits out things people then believe they or the AI made when it is simply an older human idea that was stolen and thrown into a woodchipper without any consideration, material support or recognition of the human who provided the training data that was crucial.
If you want to file off the serial numbers of other human ideas and mutilate them in an LLM type device fine but don’t claim you or the AI are actually contributing anything real.
I disagree that everything AI generates is garbage, but I do agree with the “contributing anything real” comment. That might seem like it is at odds with each other, but I have a one word reason: perl.
Back in the day, I worked extensively in perl and really did believe in TIMTOWDI. The problem with TIMTOWDI is TIMTOWDI, though. Not every system I built needed to be some unique butterfly. I just needed it to function (preferably with high efficiency). Then I started working in group projects. Perl is awful outside of single-developer environment. Imagine 5 people all declaring their own best practices and refusing to compromise as it would “violate best practices” that they had just set for themselves.
There is value in NOT creating new ways to do things simply because you can. This becomes clear the first time someone approaches you about building our own security library for something. You have no idea the amount of code copied from stackoverflow that exists in production unattributed. It simply works and no one is going to care (usually not even the people posting these solutions - which includes myself).
Even outside of that, if I sat and wrote a sub() to do some recursive file handling, I don’t own that code like some intellectual property regardless how cleverly I wrote it. I combined several documented parts into a single idea. If I don’t own those parts, I don’t see how I can own the idea that was built from them.
Mouth agape.
I hate programmers, I hate programmers, I hate programmers.
I hate when people outside a given space with zero knowledge of that space decide that their input should be of paramount value to the people living there. Don’t really know what else to tell you on that one.
As a programmer myself, I have the most to say about this.
I hate programmers because 99% of them are touch-starved, socially-constipated nerds who think that because they can solve a hard math problem that they are smarter and better than the thousands of years of social development that came before them. And so, they sit there, smugly destroying all of it because they are—and I’m being serious—too stupid to know what they’re breaking.
You don’t know why you should own a function that composes other functions you didn’t write? I’m not even going to give you the answer. Just, see if you can figure out a way that might work.