jj4211

I don't know about that.

Feels like there's a high risk of the LLM going off script and going against the points they are trying to make.

Just like Trump's AI site saying the 2020 election was not stolen.

video she posted of herself confronting a Girl Scout and the child’s mother

She thought that was a winning interaction to post of herself?

I was a fresh out of school hire as a "temp" in a team that were mostly years on as "real" employees.

So it's easy, which path did you like, giving anyone with access to a prop wheelchair however much they are trying to get out of you, or denying aid to anyone that ever managed to get up out of a wheelchair, however briefly?

I've so far defied conventional wisdom by just saying flat out when I don't want to deal with off-hours 'fun' time. Which has pretty much been every time. During work hours? Sure no problem. No I'm not going to a team dinner or evening movie.

Most egregious one was a couple decades back when the team was arranging a nice holiday dinner. This was early in my career so I hadn't yet developed the comfort to reject, but the event was "pay your own way" and the restauraunt was a $120 a person, and that is not an inflation adjusted figure. I had barely enough to make rent at the time so there's no way I was going to piss away $120 just to eat with coworkers that I get to see every day anyway. I was so nervous declining, but it got a bit easier when they acted offended I wouldn't do it and said $120 wasn't really a lot of money.

How relatable, being able to not care about what precisely you are buying and how much it costs and letting an AI just spend a few hundred dollars without you even knowing whatever the hell it was.

If trying to show getting a gift, way to show that thoughfulness of fobbing off the whole process to a bot.

It's a tricky line to walk.

On the one hand, you are absolutely right that ability to hobble over a few feet from your chair does not mean the chair is obviously not needed.

On the other, wheelchairs are a very popular prop for grifting folks.

It's pretty damn near impossible to make an informed judgement on such a matter in an instant, and lots of people do exploit that.

In terms of whether the 'clean room' approach is as critical in Europe or not, I can't be sure. It might be more permissable for someone to use a decompile as a reference and also directly work on a replacement. However I'm pretty sure starting with a decompile of proprietary software as a direct codebase would run afoul of issues.

Otherwise, imagine you have an HEVC encoded rip of a 4K blu ray. You transcode it to AV1. The bytes are totally different, and even the resultant frames are likely not even pixel for pixel identical. I don't think copyright law would deem that not a violation, regardless of jurisdiction.

Providers like MS at least should have figured out that the hypothetical ability to take your data "to go" is important, but nothing they need to worry about being actually used too much, especially in businesses.

One is the anxiety over screwing up and losing your data when you solely manage it. So huge pressure to use "a" reputable company as a steward of the data.

Another is that the user and the spend are disconnected in business scenarios. If attaching a 'cloud' document to something in the app is two clicks, but 4 clicks to do the same from desktop, then the users will want to just stick to the cloud to save them a few clicks at least. They will demand their IT provide microsoft solutions and the IT will shrug and say "well, everyone gets microsoft solutions". Back in the day my company tried to split the difference by purchasing perpetual licenses only for every third edition. Now Microsoft has made that just not viable so you either just pay for as long as you use it or you go elsewhere.

It's also why I don't think any of the providers are actually trying to screw up desktop component prices for fear of local models ruining their day. The tech market has shown they actively jump at the chance to surrender their flexibility to providers, no need to worry about them suddenly deciding to in-house things.

Microsoft already changed what they are selling. Now they are renting document storage that happens to have document modification software integrated.

They long decided that owning access to the data was more leverage than the software used to edit it. Ditto for Adobe. Pretty much immediately software as a service encouraged "don't worry about ever saving/managing your data" and it wasn't about user convenience...

You are right no one cares how it is implemented, and on select contexts, right that LLMs can produce sufficient implementation.

However it isn't generally the case that they can produce quality software. The bad news for a lot of developers is that by volume most software isn't exactly great quality either, particularly in house enterprise software is already crap, so there is large area where differently crapi isn't so bad.

I will say that people who want their software well supported are likely to be ill served by "vibed" solutions. It is really tricky to debug complex software that was vibed, whether human or GenAI. If it worked perfectly the first time around and/or the software in question is fairly disposable, well those may be fine.

Well, depends.

Software is subject to copyright. Yes you can implement the same APIs, but when you get into the visual presentation, things can get copyright related even if the code isn't being ripped off.

If you decompile rather than clone, well then the code is copyrighted even if transformed into plausible source code.

Of course then there are patents...