My car has offline maps and navigation. I don't really care for navigation, but I find the maps pretty handy. VW releases updates very infrequently, and I don't know for how long they'll keep doing that. Recently I wondered whether I could convert OpenStreetMaps into the format used by the car. Codex took around a week to do that for me, with some light steering. That project would no doubt have taken me months - maybe a whole year to do on my own, and I'm not fully confident I could pull it off as well as Codex did. I can pull the most up to date maps from OSM, edit them as much as I want, and they look great on the car. It's mind boggling to me that we have this tech.
Love that, I have similar desires to be able to control some climate controllers so I can get a more native bluetooth connection to it and override their programming for fine control of devices and have it never phone back home. One of these days I'll have time to throw an LLM at it, but I've been working on a dead project for 4 years ago I dropped because I realized how daunting it was going to be turn it into a product, but now I've made progress that would have taken me a year, in a few weekends.
I'm not sure. To be more specific, my car has a Delphi MIB2 Standard head unit (which uses NDS.Classic maps). I think the keys are likely to work with all MIB2 Standard head units, as that's how VW categorizes the updates, but I don't know about other MIB versions.
>Despite the quick spread of agentic coding, institutional inertia, affordability, and limitations in human neuroplasticity were barriers to universal adoption of the new technology.
Blaming lack of adoption purely on regressive factors follows the same frame that AI firms set. It isn't very effective satire for that reason.
It couldn't be that there is something essential and elementary that is wrong with the output, no... all these experienced experts are just troglodites and wrong and we should instead tag along with the people who offloaded the parts of their work they found tough to a machine the first chance they got.
There's no such thing as ape coding. There's still just coding, and vibe coding.
I enjoyed reading it. Whether one believes the future will look like this fictional/hypothetical one, it encourages the reader to think about what would need to become true for this future to be plausible.
Who knows? 5 people? 10? Only those who actually read it, and still not sure. Did they read it? Or did they also believe it's written by AI? I tried to believe it's written by a human when noticed its footer's note. It was hard to believe knowing my fear of today's trends, where many read is an empty dark where human time is voided. Yet, what is the main idea behind it then, nowadays, when just a few will actually read it?
Considering, how some modern attitude works for certain people, and how much power of trends and socials may offer, such terms get boosted over... and you just hope and keep believing in people...
Related: https://medium.com/@nathanladuke/b56da64a09ee (To Those Who Comment Their Opinion Without Reading the Whole Story... I was shocked at how many people simply read the title and then posted their opinion on the whole article...)
Yes, I understand what you're saying perfectly. And I had similar thoughts while I was writing this. I do not want to talk too much about the process of writing it, or the content itself, because I feel it's not right for me (the author) to talk about it. But I'd like to make it clear that I wrote this myself, and that many of the questions and points people have raised here have also been in my mind, and it was my intention to elicit this type of thinking. Thank you and all others for the comments - I really appreciate it, even the very negative ones. This is the first time I published something online and I'm very happy that it resonated with people.
If that's the case, why do we have to suffer through an AI-generated article? Just give us the prompt.
This topic interests me but I stopped reading as soon as I noticed the slop. I'd much rather read a couple of human-written paragraphs with your personal experience.
> I like how Google AI Studio allows one to delete sections and they are then no longer part of the context. Not possible in Claude, ChatGPT or Gemini, I think there one can only delete the last response.
I have the same peeve. My assumption is the ability to freely edit context is seen as not intuitive for most users - LLM products want to keep the illusion of a classic chat UI where that kind of editing doesn't make sense. I do wish ChatGPT & co had a pro or advanced mode that was more similar to Google AI Studio.
the trouble with compact is that no one really knows how it works and what it does. hence, for me at least, there is just no way I would ever allow my context to get there. you should seriously reconsider ever using compact (I mean this literally) - the quality of CC at that point is order of magnitute significantly worse that you are doing yourself significant disservice
if you actually hit the compact (you should never be there no matter what but for the sake of argument) more often than not you'll see CC going off the rails immediately after compacting is done. it even doesn't know what it did let alone you :)
