3 ms·

- “Incompatible code”? What does this even mean? “Incompatible” with what? - Have you actually read the examples in the linked github issue? What “undesirable

- “Incompatible code”? What does this even mean? “Incompatible” with what? - Have you actually read the examples in the linked github issue? What “undesirable effect” are you able to identify when an LLM tells you that a JS function simply doesn’t exist? Or when something fails subtly enough that the code you wrote based on the LLM’s advice isn’t the obvious culprit? Do you do much debugging? - Wikipedia requires references, while this LLM directly contradicts the one data source that it’s meant to help explain. Failing to see the comparison.

gAI 3y ago
If a medication is incompatible with a person's specific biology, they don’t see improvement (or their health declines). If a function is described incorrectly, you won’t see improved functionality (or you’ll see bugs). It was incompatible with the syntax/compiler/the rest of the code. Though this one won't, LLMs will cite references if asked. They’ll also provide step-by-step rationalization (though they don’t think in that way). Just like Wikipedia, you still have to check those references to verify.
- rideontime 3y ago
  > If a medication is incompatible with a person's specific biology, they don’t see improvement (or their health declines). And the specific ways that their health might decline have been studied, a list of which is included with every package of the medicine. Maybe you even get regular bloodwork to check for the specific side effects this medicine’s been seen to cause. > If a function is described incorrectly, you won’t see improved functionality (or you’ll see bugs). Hopefully! Again, how much development/debugging do you do on a daily basis? Because real developers don't accept the notion that it's ok for bugs to occur as a result of following reference documentation.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]

gAI 3y ago

If a medication is incompatible with a person's specific biology, they don’t see improvement (or their health declines). If a function is described incorrectly, you won’t see improved functionality (or you’ll see bugs). It was incompatible with the syntax/compiler/the rest of the code. Though this one won't, LLMs will cite references if asked. They’ll also provide step-by-step rationalization (though they don’t think in that way). Just like Wikipedia, you still have to check those references to verify.

rideontime 3y ago
> If a medication is incompatible with a person's specific biology, they don’t see improvement (or their health declines). And the specific ways that their health might decline have been studied, a list of which is included with every package of the medicine. Maybe you even get regular bloodwork to check for the specific side effects this medicine’s been seen to cause. > If a function is described incorrectly, you won’t see improved functionality (or you’ll see bugs). Hopefully! Again, how much development/debugging do you do on a daily basis? Because real developers don't accept the notion that it's ok for bugs to occur as a result of following reference documentation.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]