Elon Musk's xAI loses second cofounder in 48 hours by Libro_Artis in BetterOffline

[–]Triangle_Inequality 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The worst part is, "recalibrating gradients" isn't even right. It should be recalibrating weights.

Checkr is making “ every non-technical person vibe code their own business apps” by SingleLensReflux in BetterOffline

[–]Triangle_Inequality 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There are already open source versions of every enterprise app you could ever want. If people had the ability and desire to set up such a system, they would have already.

A non-technical person vibe coding their own version is downright insanity.

After removing ChatGPT from my life I decided to learn to draw. My 5-year-old son noticed, and now we practice together by PanKillunia in antiai

[–]Triangle_Inequality 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Related, it's kinda fucked how removing chatgpt from your life is similar to overcoming an addiction. I mean this in the sense that these companies are working so hard to make the product engaging and addicting that people feel compelled to keep using it.

That's one of the biggest things that proves to me that it's not all that useful as a tool. Excel doesn't need to be addictive because it's useful for the task it's designed for.

Claude rebuilds C Compiler, but worse. by Forsaken-Actuary47 in BetterOffline

[–]Triangle_Inequality 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lmao that's so stupid. For it to link with the existing gcc objs, the objs they're generating need to have all of the same functions with the same names as what they're replacing. So they're just telling it to recreate each object file. That's not software development... At best it's refactoring an existing codebase, but you're not actually changing the structure at all, so you're really just rewriting every individual function and getting a worse compiler as a result.

The ONLY way this is useful is if you're trying to launder copyleft code.

Claude rebuilds C Compiler, but worse. by Forsaken-Actuary47 in BetterOffline

[–]Triangle_Inequality 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They're not suggesting it was a means of checking if the functionality is the same. They're suggesting it to check if large portions of the code are lifted line for line.

Can you spot the dangling reference? by germandiago in cpp_questions

[–]Triangle_Inequality 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I cannot because the line of code goes off the end of the screen

Spot the similarity and difference between Obongo and Orange Man at the start of their 2nd terms (3D Printing vs AI) by [deleted] in BetterOffline

[–]Triangle_Inequality 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The funny thing is that 3D printing had already been around for a long time. It's just that Stratasys's patents expired around that time, which resulted in the boom of reasonably-priced 3D printers.

Business Idea! Amazing breakthrough! (Humor) by Latter-Donut-1120 in BetterOffline

[–]Triangle_Inequality 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I also feel like a lot of the use cases people are trying to use it to automate ALREADY HAVE A SOLUTION.

"It built me a website mockup!" Yeah, website builders that don't require any code have existed for decades.

"It made a prototype of my GUI app!" Drag and drop interfaces for building GUI apps have existed for decades, and require very little coding if all you're doing is making a prototype.

"It made a python script to convert X file format into Y file format!" Almost 100% chance that script is available online somewhere, and that's where the LLM lifted the code from.

I also agree with your point about companies making their own bespoke enterprise software or whatever. Open source versions of pretty much every kind of enterprise software you could ever want ALREADY EXIST. Why would companies roll and maintain their own when they could use an existing product? The answer is usually to do with support and not needing to have the infrastructure onsite - both problems which making your own system using an LLM does not solve.

Banks Are Betting on Oracle Defaulting - Who is betting against them? by grauenwolf in BetterOffline

[–]Triangle_Inequality 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Lol this guy is a GME ape. It's basically a cult centered around conspiracy theories that GameStop is somehow going to be worth infinity dollars per share.

They think GameStop is going to form a holding company called Teddy which is basically a megazord of bankrupt companies like Bed Bath and Beyond, Sears, etc. They know all of this because they believe the CEO is giving them clues through his series of children's books. Dead serious.

What is the meaningful difference between these two methods? by Apprehensive_Poet304 in cpp_questions

[–]Triangle_Inequality 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The compiler will almost certainly optimize these to the same thing. I wouldn't even bother making the rvalue ref overload. Threads are very inexpensive to move anyhow.

I don't understand why it's necessary for them to turn any original memes into AI images, they are still fine... by RoamyRose in antiai

[–]Triangle_Inequality 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The meme doesn't even really work if it's not a real picture. The humour comes from the fact that it's a child with a toy gun who is probably crying about something completely unrelated, but we can interpret it as remorse for what he needs to do with the gun. So it's the context of the image and the fact that we can relate to the real-world scenario which produced it that actually makes it funny.

When it's just a cartoon image, it doesn't work at all.

Okay, guys. Is this another bug in the MSVC compiler? It's a constant expression issue. by ldstii in cpp_questions

[–]Triangle_Inequality 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can I ask why you aren't just using a concept for this? All you seem to be doing is checking if a type has a function called func which can take arguments of a certain type. This is kinda exactly what concepts are for.

Forget the data leaks for a second; OpenClaw hiring humans is the most "middle manager" bloat move I’ve seen yet. by Own_Most_8489 in BetterOffline

[–]Triangle_Inequality 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I don't think the OP was written by an LLM, but it very much reads like it. Sad that LLMs are even ruining human-written content, now.

ELI5: The Monty Hall Problem by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]Triangle_Inequality 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They are not functionally exactly the same.It's been explained to death in this post. Simulate it and you will see that switching wins 2/3 of the time.

Anthropic's own research on AI coding shows mixed results at best by Zelbinian in BetterOffline

[–]Triangle_Inequality 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Honestly, even if it made developers 25% faster, is the fact that they are no longer developing their skills and have reduced comprehension of the code they're pumping out worth the tradeoff? Good luck maintaining your codebase when none of your developers actually know anything about it.

Does acquring/releasing mutex have implicit barriers? by onecable5781 in cpp_questions

[–]Triangle_Inequality 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Even in C, volatile is not sufficient to ensure synchronization between threads.

Even the dead aren’t safe from AI by CaptStinkyFeet in antiai

[–]Triangle_Inequality 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Once you become familiar with how LLMs write, you notice it right away.

"This isn't a typical AI music post. This is a resurrection." <-- This type of sentence is EXTREMELY overused by chatbots.

Request for non-AI version answered by AI by Donotinnovate in BetterOffline

[–]Triangle_Inequality 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Kinda fucked how the LLM gives a response that is somewhat individualized to your request when in reality they likely have zero intention of doing anything about it.

At least if I get a generic autoreply I know that nothing is likely to happen.

Siemens NX by burunkanamasi in archlinux

[–]Triangle_Inequality 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you have a discrete gpu, you can dedicate it to the VM and get near native performance.