It is really not a big change to the way we work unless you work in a language that has very low expressiveness like Java or Go

If we include languages like C#, javascript/typescript, python etc then that’s a huge portion of the landscape.

Personally I wouldn’t use it to generate entire features as it will generally produce working, but garbage code, but it’s useful to get boilerplate stuff done or query why something isn’t working as expected. For example, asking it to write tests for a React component, it’ll get about 80-90% of it right, with all the imports, mocks etc, you just need to write the actual assertions yourself (which we should be doing anyway).

I gave Claude a try last week at building some AWS infrastructure in Terraform based off a prompt for a feature set and it was pretty bang on. Obviously it required some tweaks but it saved a tonne of time vs writing it all out manually.

I feel like it’s more the sudden overnight hype about it rather than the technology itself. CEOs all around the world suddenly went “you all must use AI and shoe horn it into our product!”. People are fatigued about constantly hearing about it.

But I think people, especially devs, don’t like big changes (me included), which causes anxiety and then backlash. LLMs have caused quite a big change with the way we go about our day jobs. It’s been such a big change that people are likely worried about what their career will look like in 5 or 10 years.

Personally I find it useful as a pairing buddy, it can generate some of the boilerplate bullshit and help you through problems, which might have taken longer to understand by trawling through various sites.

It’s not functionally identical, the function of the right lane is to move traffic in the opposite direction to the left. It would be absolute carnage if every other vehicle decided to disregard the rules of the road and use any lane they want because it would make it theirs.

Of course the traffic in their own lane has to stop when others are breaking the rules of the road as you don’t want to hurt anyone, but it’s still dangerous and stupid to ride a bike into oncoming traffic.

She definitely should have either stopped or gone a different route, but it is incredibly dangerous to cycle head onto incoming motor traffic. Not really a great look for the cyclists.

Better off staying in the correct lane but hogging it so vehicles had no choice but to stay behind.

I’m pretty sure the EU mandated this feature.

I’d kind of think it would be in their interest to, not because they give a shit about what their end users think, but what their customers (advertisers) think. I’d imagine that advertisers are paying x amount to reach real humans that can spend money, so if it turns out that businesses are paying to advertise to bots then I can’t see them being too happy about that. Not unless they’re upfront with businesses and they tell them that x% of their user base is bots and they’ll only charge them to advertise to real people.

I get it. They want to combat bots and potentially even detect if a person is old enough to use the platform. However Facebook has eroded absolutely any trust that there’s no way I’d give them this. Not that I use Facebook anyway.