The day when it doesn’t crush the environment

Why should we indulge your hypothetical? They’re actively building fossil fuel powered data centers so it’s not even moving in that direction.

And most tech literate people that are anti-genAI would also prefer if it didn’t completely usurp the term AI or that everything historically called ML got also got sucked in. You’re acting like anti people made that happen but it was the boosters and now AI=chatgpt is in the common lexicon. Nitpicking their language when you obviously know damn well what they mean is just silly.

find that their peers are achieving more in a shorter time then they are

I’ve been reading this for 3 years and all I’ve seen so far is my peers making more work for me by going on wild goose chases and making me wade through slop. I do believe there are ways to use it responsibly and productively but that is definitely not what is happening on average.

I don’t understand why so many people decided to take “LLMs increase productivity” as an axiom instead of using their fucking eyes and looking at what is happening around them.

Regardless of how he got there, this is a pretty obnoxious and useless commit message…

ethical tool sourcing

Almost everybody that brings up ethical LLMs is full of shit because they point to them existing as a defense then turn around and use claude.

It just means they liked hollow Knight

https://distantprovince.by/posts/its-rude-to-show-ai-output-to-people/ is more thoughtful and interesting

“While these mechanisms were often used to bypass Microsoft account setup, they also inadvertently skip critical setup screens, potentially causing users to exit OOBE with a device that is not fully configured for use.”

Lol sure. If that was the real reason they’d simply let you create a local account. The audacious lying is just insulting.

Hallucinations bullshit

Trusting it to have not fucked with your data while formatting it is pretty bold.

They are so much better than using a search engine to parse web forums and stack overflow,

The hallucinations (more accurately bullshitting) and the fact they have to get new training data but are discouraging people from engaging in the structures that do so make this highly debatable

You’re assuming honesty and they’ve earned the opposite posture.

Even that description is vastly overselling it’s usefulness. Every time someone says it’s like a junior dev I just sigh, because literally the only reason I like junior devs is because they turn into not junior devs. Never once has assigning something to a junior dev made my job easier. The entire goal is to train them to the point they make PRs that I don’t have to walk them through reworking.

It remains to be seen whether the advent of “agentic AIs,” designed to autonomously execute a series of tasks, will change the situation.

“Agentic AI is already reshaping the enterprise, and only those that move decisively — redesigning their architecture, teams, and ways of working — will unlock its full value,” the report reads.

“Devs are slower with and don’t trust LLM based tools. Surely, letting these tools off the leash will somehow manifest their value instead of exacerbating their problems.”

Absolute madness.

But we already had tools that gave us 90%

More reliable ones.

People tell me the hallucinations aren’t a big deal because people should fact check everything.

1. People aren’t fact checking
2. If you have to fact check every single thing you’re not saving any time over becoming familiar with whatever the real source of info is

Yes you’re must likely correct. I was simply pushing back on the other poster talking like ubuntu releases other than lts are unstable/testing releases. They are intended to be stable and usable, which is certainly not the case if they include the core utils replacement as it currently stands.

A test suite from phoronix having issues is certainly enough of a canary in the coalmine that this stuff is not ready for showtime. You have been saying that non-lts ubuntu releases are basically unstable releases but that has never been the intent and is not even what they say.

https://ubuntu.com/about/release-cycle

Every six months between LTS versions, Canonical publishes an interim release of Ubuntu, with 25.04 being the latest example. These are production-quality releases and are supported for 9 months, with sufficient time provided for users to update, but these releases do not receive the long-term commitment of LTS releases.

Key words “production quality”. This sure doesn’t seem “production quality” to me.

Why would something that hasn’t reached sufficient test coverage, or that fails one of the most common test suites around, be put into one of the largest distros around, lts version or not? It’s honestly ridiculous

🤣