skisnow

joined 4 months ago
[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 hour ago

There's such a huge gap between what I read about GPT-5 online, versus the overwhelmingly disappointing results I get from it for both coding and general questions.

I'm beginning to think we're in the end stages of Dead Internet, where basically nothing you see online has any connection to reality.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 3 points 22 hours ago

Your own graph shows the ratio of renewables to coal hugely shooting up in the last 4 years.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 28 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

How naïve it was of me, to think that the New York Avianca case in 2023 was high profile enough for lawyers to have learnt their lesson, but nope, it's getting worse each and every month that goes by:

https://www.damiencharlotin.com/hallucinations/

It doesn't help that the most common outcomes there are "Warning" or a fine in the low thousands. If a legal practice can save $500,000 a year on avoiding doing their own research, and the worse that's likely to happen is "Warning" or a $2,000 fine, then why would they not?

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago

I've found them useful, sometimes, but nothing like a fraction of what the hype would suggest.

They're not adequate replacements for code reviewers, but getting an AI code review does let me occasionally fix a couple of blunders before I waste another human's time with them.

I've also had the occasional bit of luck with "why am I getting this error" questions, where it saved me 10 minutes of digging through the code myself.

"Create some test data and a smoke test for this feature" is another good timesaver for what would normally be very tedious drudge work.

What I have given up on is "implement a feature that does X" questions, because it invariably creates more work than it saves. Companies selling "type in your app idea and it'll write the code" solutions are snake-oil salesman.