They’ve done it before in the USA. My guess is that they want to push their non-English offerings, which is something they’ve only focused on recently.

Except that spammers can curate that set of posts and comments similar to legit users.

Recycling copper is already cheaper than mining a lot of cases.

There is also a lot more driving in the USA, even in a decent transit area like Chicago.

The City of Charlottesville has a master plan which includes infrastructure upgrades and expanding their business network.

https://www.charlottesville.gov/1666/Transit-Strategic-Plan-TSP

It sounds like the people suing don’t want to ride the bus.

A lot of people used to be miserable in families and relationships. Now they can be miserable alone.

The problem is that wealth inequality in the USA has an age component.

Boomers are far wealthier than previous generations at their equivalent age as a percentage of national wealth. They are also incredibly sensitive to taxes as their retirement depends on managing wealth.

In contrast, Gen X and millennials are poorer than Boomers at their equivalent age and mainly contribute to the economy with their labor.

It isn’t a perfect divide, but there is a wealth divide that represents itself somewhat as a generational divide.

Not really. I’d argue the dot com bust was worse due to the quantity of websites that died because they didn’t actually have a business model.

What we’re seeing is a tech industry where all the tech is on the right side of the S curve and trying one last stab at a technology that may be on the left side.

But it isn’t about creating quality results. It is about creating good enough results where the cost of failure in AI over humans is lower than the cost of humans over AI.

This has been Silicon Valley’s MO for generations.

It sounds more like "I don’t want to shower and will use any excuse to not shower.

I feel this.

5 minutes if you expect me to see it all.

If I get a 50 minute video, I better get a timestamp.

This is it exactly. I know it is there, but I’m hazy on what it was exactly and it needs to be 100% right.

I’m asking if it worth spending more money on human developers to write code that isn’t slop.

Everyone here has been mentioning costs, but they haven’t been comparing them together to see if the cost of using human developers located in a high cost of living American city is worth the benefits.

Historically open source and closed source have done the same thing, so why is this one tool usage so wildly different?

Because, as noted by another replier, open source wants working code and closed source just want code that runs.

That’s basically my question. If the standards of code are different, AI slop may be acceptable in one scenario but unacceptable in another.

So I was trying to make a statement that the developers of AI for coding may not have the high bar for quality and optimization that closed source developers would have, then was told that the major market was internal business code.

So, I asked, do companies need code that runs quickly on the systems that they are installed on to perform their function. For instance, can an unqualified programmer use AI code to build an internal corporate system rather than have to pay for a more qualified programmer’s time either as an internal hire or producing.

Does business internal software need to be optimized?