There's a lot of overlap between "AI is evil megacapitalism" and "AI is ineffective", and I never understood the latter, but I am increasingly arriving to the understanding that the latter claim isn't real, it's just a soldier in the war being fought over the former.
We shape the world through our choices, generally under the umbrella of deterministic systems. AI is non-deterministic, but instead amplifies the concerns by a few wealthy corporations / individuals.
So is AI effective at generating marketing material or propagating arguably vapid value systems in the face of ecological, cultural, and economic crisis? I'd argue yes. But effective also depends on an intention, and that's not my intention, so it's not as effective for me.
I think we need more "manual" choice, and more agency.
Open source library development has to follow very tight sets of style adherence because of its extremely distributed nature, and the degree to which feature development is as much the design of new standards as it is writing working code. I would imagine that it is perhaps the kind of programming least well suited to AI assistance.
AI speeds me up a tremendous amount in my day job as a product engineer.
> AI speeds me up a tremendous amount in my day job as a product engineer.
Sure, there are specialized and non-specialized models.
I was asking if you've measured your "tremendous speed-up" using AI or you just feel like it is a "tremendous speed-up". As the research indicates you may feel like you are sped up 20% while you are actually 20% slower. I'm not saying that you don't actually have a speed-up from AI.
Ineffective at what? Writing good code, or producing any sort of valuable insight? Yes, it's ineffective. Writing unmaintainable slop at line rate? Or writing internet-filling spam, or propagating their owners' points of view? Very effective.
I just think the things they are effective at are a net negative for most of us.
