A great majority of business applications do run on open source projects, and in turn, are affected by them if things go awry. It’s a prisoner’s dilemma in this case.
Currently: generating hype at a lower cost without emotion. Is the product itself better? Often no. But salaries have a large weight in the consideration, and hype corroborates the choice.
If the hype wasn't real why have people stopped coding by hand? People like you are delusional. The hype is real.
Now, that being said there is something to be said about AI making your life easier. It's not making your life easier. It's upping your output by 10x but it's also upping the demand for output by 10x.
I’m not understanding how websockets fixes the issue of pushing JSON to the client side for it to be rendered into HTML. JSON is just a data object can translate into text to place in the HTML document.
Moving this to the backend with a templating engine still requires a formatted object, correct? I like SSR rendering, but I think the diagram with websockets is missing a key step, where the database results still need transformed into a consumable format that gets plugged into the templating engine. That step can’t get eliminated with either model.
Regardless of where the document is built, it needs to consume some format of structured data. Am I missing something?
> Lowering the barrier to entry for writing code and other tasks feels democratizing
It really isn’t doing any of that, though. When AI gets it wrong, that person needs to understand why it is wrong, and without that upfront knowledge or skill of reasoning, it’s much less direct to actually build something in the correct ways.
But for real, this is bad. Like, really, really bad. And I understand this could have been done before by just screenshotting an image from Google Maps and feeding into an AI image processor, but now, that whole process is streamlined and immediately available, and Google’s messaging is that we can just fact check it ourselves with another AI tool.
Well, that’s only possible with the original, non-altered image. Someone takes a screenshot and puts this up on a news broadcast or Twitter post, and then, how is anyone going to determine what is real or fake anymore?
What isn't reasonable about this approach? I think most people have got GeoAI backwards, creating derived imagery via AI is a terrible idea. Building better tools than we have with AI, using existing geoscience principles is absolutely the right approach.
While it is definitely an issue if a single agent has access to both public and private data, this feature shouldn’t have been delivered where this is an allowed state. At least, GitHub should have ensured there are two kinds of agents: one for public, and one for internal, and prevent crossover between them. I get this doesn’t appear to be the most shiny feature, but the other, current side is just allowing Pandora’s box to be opened by naive policies.
Lastly, even with a private agent, being able to ask it for secrets and have it likely respond with them back is really, really, really bad.
