but even the smallest modern programs would be monsters in Assembly, so it's simplicity doesn't help much, and you're juggling a lot more than 3 bean bags.
but this is not how people use - or providers sell - LLMs. They don't ask questions about how to do small steps, they just ask it to do the entire project, finish quickly and learn nothing. If the workflow was many, tight iterations it would be closer to a tool than an automation.
"some" do not a system make. "Some" people succeed in the current educational system, but others would argue people succeed "despite" the system, not "because" of it.
It seems we're about to get a massive stress test of such a theory.
Based on my experiences seeing what people actually do with AI tools: very. If this was a situation where I was seeing higher quality apps, PR's, and community building I would have few qualms about AI.
Instead it's created swamps in the art community, choas and bloat in the FOSS communities, a stronger sense of mistrust with traditional search, a deepening of the Dead Internet Theory, more broken tools to scrounge through... where is this supposed "benefit" I'm getting out of this?
Bear in mind it takes very few individuals to create a LOT of this sort of low-quality AI content. That makes it hard to judge how many are using Agentic methods vs "only Advice" vs "no AI."
LLM is an issue (to most of us) when it replaces exploration, thinking and effort to aquire skill. Whether it's vibe-coding an app, or thinking through a math problem. Jury is out this will atually dimish the next generation of thinkers. But seems like a valid concern to me.
2. This particular case of LLM usage (to teach us photoshop) is replacing traditional tutorials. It can help people learn things. This is also valid to me.
The existence of 2, doesn't eliminate 1. Existence of 1 doesn't eliminate 2. There's no strawmans here. I also think it's fair that the promise of LLMs (and AIs), isn't to replace tutorials, but to displace and automate much more.
Look at the marketing. "Complete projects", "Build apps". "Get advice". How often are we seeing "build a functioning workflow and validation pipeline and collaborate in incremental stages" or anything boring to that effect?
As someone who spent a lot of time supporting users and understanding their challenges with these tools, there's a lot of can you do X vs how can I do X, at least a 10x if not 100x difference.
IE: Model do this for me vs teach me.
Enough that I know people who have built businesses purely training people.
Eh, it's not unique, it's just that the American ones seem to be so much more empowered, excessive, and capable of generating news and social media headlines.
The UK variant seems to have more traditional failure modes of "excessive charges for maintenance of communal areas": https://parliamentnews.co.uk/tales-of-intimidation-excessive... , but people are still capable of having the occasional fistfight or protracted legal dispute about the wrong kind of hedge in a more informal, adhoc way.
accrete means grow or make larger/greater; this is the opposite were a bunch of value moved around, some was lost (from an efficiency / opportunity cost perspective) and a bunch was concentrated into the hands of a few. That's not value growth.
True, I meant to say value was ejected from this i.e. there were some peripheral winners. I had a totally wrong definition in my mind of the word "accrete" (I was linking it to accretion discs around black holes).
I don't want to complain too much about free stuff, but when they say "Early Release - Raw and Unedited" they are not kidding. It's not just layout, illustrations or organization; it reads like the authors' notes for a future book project.
this definitely does not require a fridge be "online" and have the ability to be remotely programmed. At the very least have the monitoring and potentially I/O capabilities in a different device that can easily be removed from the system. Integrated smart fridges deserve to Suck it, Jin-yang!
reply