So just declare how you used the tool?

That can quickly get complicated, and more importantly noone does that.

People who want to do it generally. Just call for a “metadata tag” in the commit.

The thing is, what are you actually trying to achieve with this disclosure? How does it help you?

If you’re going to treat AI assisted code the same way you treat human code (with a ton of scrutiny - which you absolutely should), then what is the point?

Do you also want to know what IDE was used, which autocomplete engine, or what OS?

…elaborate? Anything that’s actually reliable?

There’s a difference between “not being able to catch everyone” and having effectively no way to catch anyone.

And yes, unfortunately there are plenty of laws with the same issue (especially here and in the past decade or two) and it sucks - it only teaches people to ignore rules and a lot of them make you a criminal for no reason.

I disagree. For one, it’s unenforceable, just like outright banning it.

But AI assistance can also mean a lot of different things, from outright vibecoding through autocomplete up to only asking it to so review. It diminishes the human work in the eyes of other people, because a simple disclaimer doesn’t distinguish between the work done, and also encourages people to point out to AI as a scapegoat for their mistakes.

Good code always was and should always be one where a human is fully responsible for it; if you decide to vibecode and happens to end up with perfect code, good; if you write it fully yourself but it’s crap it doesn’t absolve you that you didn’t use AI…

It’s a tool, so use it responsibly like any other tool and stand behind your code no matter what tools you used.

Your previous post heavily implied that you preordered and are defending that despite your views.

By all means if you wait for the reception, some actual gameplay footage or reviews and like it, then by all means buy it.

The original commenter seemed to mostly complain about people preordering it blindly…

Not really; usually when something doesn’t work as you like on Windows youre SOL…

If they’re used to chase down people the general public doesn’t like, it might even be applauded.

Efficient yes, but humanoid robots are much more likely to be accepted by the general public.

Have you considered that the down votes are because your comment adds nothing to the discussion except ragebait?

Even better when it also does “emergency avoidance” and sends you right into guardrails or oncoming traffic. That happens only once to you unwanted during the lifetime of the car and you immediately turn that shit off forever.

There should be a ceiling with patents, where if you make 10x back of what it cost your r&d (or whatever 5x of your yearly revenue), the patent should just be considered expired no matter how much time passed.

It should never be an infinite source of money.

I mean that you would have to test yourself. To me it seems like AI funnily enough has the same issues as humans, and that’s that it works worse in legacy codebases full of tech debt, and in large monoliths.

But it can still be an invaluable tool.

Indeed the more skilled you are the more infuriating it becomes when it does the dumbest shit.

It can write code decently well and fast, and is amazing at finding stuff in a large project.

But you still 100% need to verify what it does and truly understand it.

Personally, I think a moral company would offer permanent discounts to long term customers, but there isn’t a single company on earth I’m aware of that actually does that.

JetBrains do it with their IDE subscriptions, they give you a massive discount if you’re subscribed for a few years, and even time on stuff like their educational license counts towards that. Super refreshing to see.

OpenAI literally has Google connectors to work with your documents. This is meaningless.

It can still be pretty difficult to jump ship for any large corporation, but yeah there’s certainly harder things.

I mean if you write malware “for a good cause” plenty of people will rightfully judge you for subverting their expectations, and the reasoning doesn’t matter thst much. And it’s not like they’re completely in the wrong either.

…but do yoz “understand libraries” by reading every line of their code, or by reading the documentation? And only in the parts you’re actually interested in?

Yeah, and I’m never going to use it, just like I don’t use any of the other existing fields - it doesn’t matter.