> And depending how you drive you might not use friction brakes at all.
I’ve been told that should remember to use your friction brakes once in a while, to keep them in shape. Is this still true with cars that have effective engine brakes?
It is still true and it is a big deal on EVs which are using calipers instead of drums for braking; i.e. Tesla. Problem is that their brake calipers would rust (due to lack of usage) and then seize on major braking and would not disengage anymore.
Use it or lose it kind of situation with brakes on EVs
As I understand it, the brilliant idea is that the small variantions in brightness of the pixels look just like standard noise. Distinguishing the actual noise from the algorithm is not possible, but it is still possible to verify that the 'noise' has the correct pattern.
A Danish audio newspaper host / podcaster had the exact apposite conclusion when he used ChatGPT to write the manuscript for one his episodes. He ended up spending as much time as he usually does because he had to fact check everything that the LLM came up with. Spoiler: It made up a lot of stuff despite it being very clear in the prompt, that it should not do so. To him, it was the most fun part, that is writing the manuscript, that the chatbot could help him with. His conclusion about artificial intelligence was this:
“We thought we were getting an accountant, but we got a poet.”
I love this turn of phrase. It quite nicely evokes the difference between how the reader thinks vs how the LLM does.
It also invites reflections on what “sentience” means. In my experience — make of it what you will — correct fact retrieval isn’t really necessary or sufficient for there to be a lived, first-person experience.
Making stuff up is not actually an issue. What matters is how you present it. If I was less sure about this I would write: Making stuff up might not be an issue. It could be that how you present it is more important. Even less sure: Perhaps it would help if it didn't sound equally confident about everything?
It's not the exact opposite*, the author said that if you're doing boilerplate _code_ it's probably fine.
The thing is that since it can't think, it's absolutely useless when it comes to things that hasn't been done before, because if you are creating something new, the software won't have had any chance to train on what you are doing.
So if you are in a situation in which it is a good idea to create a new DSL for your problem **, then the autocruise control magic won't work because it's a new language.
Now if you're just mashing out propaganda like some brainwashed soviet apparatchik propagandist, maybe it helps. So maybe people who writes predictable slop like this the guardian article (https://archive.is/6hrKo) would be really grateful that their computer has a cruise control for their political spam.
) if that's what you meant
*) which you statistically speaking might not want to do, but this is about actually interesting work where it's more likely to happen*
In a world where the AI can understand your function library near flawlessly and compose it in to all sorts of things, why would you put the effort into a DSL that humans will have to learn and the AI will trip over? This is a dead pattern.
As a writer I find his take appalling and incomprehensible. So, apparently not all writers agree that writing with AI is fun. To me, it’s a sickening violation of integrity.
Yeah, if I were their reader, I'd most likely never read anything from them again, since nothing's stopping them from doing away with integrity altogether and just stitching together a bunch of scripts ('agents') into an LLM slop pipeline.
It's so weird how people use LLMs to automate the most important and rewarding parts of the creative process. I get that companies have no clue how to market the things, but it really shows a lack of imagination and self-awareness when a 'creative' repackages slop for their audience and calls it 'fun'.
After using Prettier to format my code and turning on format-on-save, I pretty much don’t use the tab key anymore. This doesn’t invalidate your point, - I am merely guessing as to why the tab key seemingly has been reassigned.
