> the performance of systems like ChatGPT in programming, when evaluated systematically (rather than listening to peoples' subjective opinions about it) is alwa

> the performance of systems like ChatGPT in programming, when evaluated systematically (rather than listening to peoples' subjective opinions about it) is always very poor (and not in a "very theoretical sense of code quality", but in the sense of code that just doesn't do the job). I feel like you didn't read what I wrote. I used ChatGPT to write a script. It takes information from Shopify and writes it to a reporting spreadsheet in a way that I used to do manually. It literally does do the job - that was the whole point of my comment. You couldn't do the job any better, because the job is already done perfectly - it fulfills 100% of what it needs to do. > Are you really comfortable handing off your ability to write programs and create applications to one product, owned by one company? Doesn't that just completely take away your independence and even your choice of what you can program? I cannot understand how you're getting to this point. I already can't program (at least not to any particularly useful standard), so how does using ChatGPT to program take away my independence? It gives me the ability to do more things than I could before without relying on others who can program - that's an increase in independence. And in terms of giving away my choice... no. I can still learn Python or any other language I choose. You're writing as though I've signed an exclusive programming rights contract with OpenAI. I'm just using their tool because it does what I need.