831–840 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For now
So what you are saying is it's not worth $20, for now. Obviously if they start charging for the free version, they may also jack the price for the premium one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And yet you’d almost certainly complain if an American company meddled in your country’s politics.
Should the language model treat every political party in every country equally?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You use it consistently during the workday and it's still not worth $20/mo?
People are so cheap it's ridiculous. If we ever get past people being unwilling to pay for software beyond rates of 1 cent per hour tech will blow up to 10x as big as it is right now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> including software highly unlikely. You should be concerned if you are just plumbing between different software stacks, but even that is likely hard to fully automate.
You underestimate how powerful it already is. Have you tried Copilot or coding with ChatGPT? If this is the very first iteration it won't be long before many developers are fully replaced.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think so but I wanted some of the paid features. Even still, if you look at the costs it's NOTHING. Lets just say it's $400/year. That comes out to about $1.5 a day. I'm earning at that time $284 per day. It probably reduced my work stress by 20% so this was incredibly cheap. And even then I used that license for 2 years, so it was really 75 cents a day. Developers will spend $5 on a bagel but not $5 a day for tool…
> Developers will spend $5 on a bagel but not $5 a day for tools, it's pretty wild That's because savings-due-to-tools don't scale but rental does. I can all but guarantee that you're using, daily, some tool that is free. Why aren't you paying $5 a day for it? You've gotten more value out of bash, grep and related tools than IntelliJ is ever worth to you, and yet if I came up to you and said "here, use my replacement…
Because nobody has been crafty enough to capitalize on that market, or is unable to provide a sufficiently convincing alternative that would attract people to it.
For example, I can get by with something like mRemoteNG for tabbed SSH sessions: https://mremoteng.org/
It's kind of quirky but works. Someone else might appreciate something like the excellent MobaXTerm more, which adds multi-execution capabilities, a GUI for port forwarding and much more: https://mobaxterm.mobatek.net/
Sometimes free tools also become paid, see Docker Desktop (for business) or something like Lens: both are proof that, it feeling like a rug pull aside, many people will pay for what even was formerly a free tool.
On the opposite side of the spectrum, you have developers that can't capitalize on their software and the projects aren't sustainable: https://staltz.com/software-below-the-poverty-line.html
On a more positive note, this is why Open collective, GitHub Sponsors and other crowd funding solutions are nice, since now you can throw money towards whatever projects you support and think deserve to exist.
> You've gotten more value out of bash, grep and related tools than IntelliJ is ever worth to you, and yet if I came up to you and said "here, use my replacement grep, bash, etc for only $5/day" you'd laugh.
Someone might laugh, but there's a project out there that attempts to commercially create a terminal replacement: https://www.warp.dev/
Many would find the idea offensive (such a core part of their interaction with the computer having paid aspects), but that's just the world that we live in. Not all IDEs are free. Not all OSes are free. You don't even own software nowadays, more often you just rent it. If there is profit to be made, someone will make it.
I think that the free software movement has its nice aspects, but people will absolutely pay for whatever makes their lives easier or more pleasant.
I've been using ChatGPT pretty consistently during the workday and have found it useful for open ended programming questions, "cleaning up" rough bullet points into a coherent paragraph of text, etc. $20/month useful is questionable though, especially with all the filters. My "in between" solution has been to configure BetterTouchTool (Mac App) with a hotkey for "Transform & Replace Selection with Javascript". This i…
You use it consistently during the workday and it's still not worth $20/mo?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Use \S which is the opposite set of \s which avoids eating word boundaries too. \b(dog\S*)|(\S*cat)\b You could also use a \B instead of a \S though there are different meanings there.
It almost does the trick https://regex101.com/r/sbpy8s/1 But this matches for example dog.cat as one single word. But I would like that it matches separately dog and cat in this case. Likewise, I’d want for example dogapple-bananacat to be matched as two separate words dogapple and bananacat After a bit more reading online I thought that maybe the following regex would do what I want: \b(dog\p{L}*)|(\p{L}*cat)\b http…
To me it feels like if 90% of $TASK content out there would be bad and people would struggle with it, then the AI-genrated $TASK output would be similarly flawed, be it regarding a programming language or something else.
As a silly example, consider how much bad legacy PHP code is out there and what the answers to some PHP questions could become because of that.
But it's still possible to get answers to simplistic problems reasonably fast, or at least get workable examples to then test and iterate upon, which can easily save some time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You realize that near human-level AI for $20/month is a bargain ChatGPT isn't remotely “near human-level AI”, though.
Uhh have you used it? It's pretty close. Its not always correct but neither are humans.its generally pretty correct and extremely fast.
In short, the code it produces has to be reviewed by programmers who know what they're doing. Sometimes that speeds things up to have it produce the code and we review it, but sometimes it slows things down and it's easier to just write it yourself.
I see ChatGPT as an extremely powerful tool that can boost a programmer's productivity, but despite its incredible capability it cannot be trusted in ways that we can trust human programmers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reality has an inherent liberal bias. In all honesty though, the dataset it was trained on may have a liberal bias. This is _precisely_ the sort of bias you should expect from a large language model .............................
What do you mean about liberal bias.... Reality is by it's very nature unbiased. It just...is
I'm not sure you can produce a truly unbiased model without actively interfering with it.
Just consider the fact that you'll find less republicans among scientists. (source: https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2009/07/09/section-4-sc...)
Now the research-based data on ChatGPT will be biased. It takes no active "inserting" by OpenAI. It may manage creating the bias all by itself.
I've been using ChatGPT pretty consistently during the workday and have found it useful for open ended programming questions, "cleaning up" rough bullet points into a coherent paragraph of text, etc. $20/month useful is questionable though, especially with all the filters. My "in between" solution has been to configure BetterTouchTool (Mac App) with a hotkey for "Transform & Replace Selection with Javascript". This i…
Nice, I'm the developer of BetterTouchTool and I'll definitely use this one myself :-)