(no title)
flyingspaceship | 1 year ago
I had a ton of headaches from blindly accepting it's output when I'm in a rush and then later on realizing that it made my code dumber and reduced functionality. There were nuances as to why I was coding things the way that I was, why I used solution C, and not solution A, when A was the most obvious and rote, but broke features.
solumunus|1 year ago
sunaookami|1 year ago
avree|1 year ago
mewpmewp2|1 year ago
bravetraveler|1 year ago
To be blunt, it's perfectly reasonable. They didn't even get that proclaimed "one percent!"
How does one even meaningfully measure this? No matter.
In their case, instead of saving time or effort, it was adding. It was a removable cost.
If one really wants to dwell, there's game theory. Could it be made to be effective? Probably. Is it worth it? Don't know.
They told us 'no', we should listen for their situation.
At risk of splitting hairs, I need more than one percent. This isn't a vacuum, I'm not a spherical cow, etc.
Point being: wanting both my money and attention has a high bar of admission. Learning a thing has a cost, becoming dependent, and so on.
I'm well into rambling now, feel free to tune out. I'm not sacrificing autonomy for a pittance. I was fine before I knew about $OFFERING. Truth in advertising is idealistic, at best.
flyingspaceship|1 year ago
However in the case of AI, I am not sure it helps me code any faster. I have to do tons of code cleanup when it messes something up and I "forgot" the logic of how the application was working because I let AI take the reins.