Lots of humans use AI to draft emails. I see it all over the business world. I would assume it's real sentiment and respond accordingly. They likely wrote something real and had AI polish it.

I generally produce nearly the same code I'd write myself about 5x faster with AI. I don't just let Claude Code run wild for a long time and have a mess to review. I have it do small chunks I can quickly review, give it feedback, iterate, etc until I like the output, then I move on to the next step. This takes time of course but I've found it faster than reviewing a giant mess of a code review.

My experience as well. Opus 5.5 is really good at matching the existing coding style. I often look at code and think I wrote it, only to realize it was written by Opus.

The trick is to give it enough guidance about the style you prefer.

Share the concrete problems you have with LLMs and we might be able to help you out.

if you were serious you would know this is an unserious bar to try and set.

Why? It would help understand what “the same code I would’ve written” means.

if that were the intent it wouldn’t have needed someone else to explain the demand.

I was just listening to a Sanderson interview. He's annoyed by it too. It's his publisher wanting the books to be easy to get into. He's dealing with it in Mistborn era 3 where's he's trying to figure out how to re-explain everything and it's annoying him because he just wants to show allomancers doing cool stuff.

He's blaming the publishers now? I only managed to go through like 2 or 3 Mistborns before I got absolutely bored about the "technical" explanations. I've never read a D&D manual but I think it would be as fun.

Now if anyone would invest in him continuing Elantris...

The $100 plans are plenty for me to use nearly all day. I'm using between $1500-3000 worth of tokens a month via those plans.

I definitely see the pricing model. I can afford $100, maybe $200, but not $3000.

Because human beings are irrational and want "apps". I have numerous examples of native apps that are just wrappers around the web app performing extremely well (massively increasing conversion rates, revenue, etc) over the existing PWA.

Nothing in our product runs on AI but productivity would slow down for sure.

I've synced 20 years of Gmail to a local Thunderbird via imap. The initial sync took a few days but it was pretty simple to set up.

Not usually.

I've had AI slow me down twice.

Once, it was just failing to build simple flows for complex business logic getting added to existing complex business logic. It was more efficient for me to just spend a few hours and handcode it to get clean code.

Second time is partially my fault. I had a spec with about 10 stages. I let it run stage 1 and it got overzealous and finished the project. Reviewing, tweaking, and testing the massive change took me several days. I should have just wiped it and started over. It would have been much faster. I had maxed out my weekly usage already so I didn't want to redo it.

They're probably tracking click throughs and what placement you saw, what AB tests were visible, etc.

Laws like this really need to only be enforced for companies of certain sizes.

In the EU some companies simply cannot grow because of laws like that. They might want to grow, but can't because of laws that says if your company has more than X employees you suddenly have to deal with a bunch of extra bureaucracy and reporting requirements. These companies purposely stay small, and basically has stopped hiring, even if they could use more manpower.

This has its own issues. Big bad actors can now split their activities between more smaller companies to avoid some regulation. I've seen it happening.

That's the tradeoff for allowing smaller companies flexibility to thrive without being swamped in regulations and fees.

that's fair game though. Either way they waste money on administrative overhead, which seems to be the goal of this whole procedure

Selective enforcement is a tyranny generator.

How about the law doesn’t exist if it doesn’t actually make sense?

Selective enforcement is just tyranny, but what I think they were getting at is a minimum size enshrined in law. I don't think it's a great idea, really highlights how arbitrary this all is and presents a risk of advantaging the worst actors more than real makers, but it's a valid way forward.

Laws like this are a good idea but its too burdensome for small companies so it cripples innovations and small businesses. Only applying it to larger companies let's it apply to only the companies who have the largest impact and also can afford compliance, while not stifling small businesses. Not perfect but I think it's a decent tradeoff.

there are many federal laws in the US (and im sure other countries) that only apply when your company reaches a certain size. This is the most obvious way to balance regulatory burden on new companies while still enforcing regulations on large companies that have enough resources to comply.

The law makes sense, the details where things don't make sense

That would just add tons of extra paperwork and a much larger administrative system to vet all the sizes of companies. IRL they will probably not even be enforcing this widely (like GDPR) but the costs will still be imposed on any business wanting to sell in Europe.