21–30 of 81 posts
The example AI-generated explanation shown doesn't seem any more helpful than the original error. It just states the same information in a long-winded manner.
Errors and warnings are already deterministic and unambiguous. Why introduce the opportunity to confuse people or just be plain wrong?
What's funny is Prompt injection warning at the bottom. "Many of LLM applications are susceptible to a form of abuse known as prompt injection. This feature is no different. It is possible to trick the LLM into accepting instructions that are not intended by the developers."
Yeah I don’t love the idea of an error being able to prompt inject i to a javascript console, even if it is very sandboxed…
https://developer.chrome.com/docs/devtools/console/format-st...
> Are located in one of the supported regions and are at least 18 years old.
Seriously. For to get an explanation of a freaking JS error message.
Now for a debug session you need a Google account, to agree with a legal notice, a privacy notice and be at least 18 years old and boil I don't know how many liters of water for generating a text that could be static in some documentation center / KB.
I love some self deprecation humor Google, too bad it is a little late for April Fools.
Why does this exist? The example AI-generated explanation shown doesn't seem any more helpful than the original error. It just states the same information in a long-winded manner. Errors and warnings are already deterministic and unambiguous. Why introduce the opportunity to confuse people or just be plain wrong?
I can't wait for end users to submit bug reports containing Geminis interpretation instead of the actual error message.
Now he has an AI to help hallucinate how he'd easily solve any problem.