6 ms·
That's how AI is supposed to be used, no? That's what the providers advertise - it increases development speed, a lot, it replaces devs and so on. But I guess
by lucianbr 8mo ago
That's how AI is supposed to be used, no? That's what the providers advertise - it increases development speed, a lot, it replaces devs and so on.
But I guess it's only ok when you work on regular joe facing projects, where the consequences of bugs are on powerless users. If the consequences are on Google, well, that's not acceptable now is it?
- ddalex 8mo agoThe consequences for Google are that the people are misusing the keys and the Google is fixing that. They're not banning anybody using proper API keys
- otabdeveloper4 8mo ago> using AI for vibes is a fast track to bugs and security incidents Yes, that's what he said.
- ForHackernews 8mo ago[flagged]
- ddalex 8mo agoA human is not punished, the access of the robot to the API is restricted. The human has not suffered any damage.
- ForHackernews 8mo agoThe human paid money for access that has now been revoked.
- ddalex 8mo agoThe human also started the bot.
- pja 8mo agoYou’re responsible for the things your AI agent does.
- lucianbr 8mo agoIf Google and OpenAI and the rest would say this as loud as they praise their models, I would never write comments like that. But this is the fine print, buried somewhere. And so we need to bring it up, because, lo and behold, it matters.
- ForHackernews 8mo agoI'll be very surprised if our corporate masters allow that to be true, legally https://incidentdatabase.ai/cite/622/ https://incidentdatabase.ai/cite/622/
- Aurornis 8mo ago> That's how AI is supposed to be used, no? That's what the providers advertise - it increases development speed, a lot, it replaces devs and so on. Not really. There’s a difference between accelerating development in the hands of an experienced developer versus having somebody just slop code by hoping for the best. Adopting AI doesn’t equal removing code review. These were two separate choices combined.
- lucianbr 8mo ago> https://blog.samaltman.com/the-gentle-singularity https://blog.samaltman.com/the-gentle-singularity Search for "review": 0 matches. Of course the fine print says to review, just like the ultimate control of the "full self driving" rests with the human driver. But why is the fine print fine, and not large as the large print? Maybe because you're not supposed to pay attention to it? Could this be?