You are ignoring ALL of the of the positive applications of AI from several decades of development, and only focusing on the negative aspects of generative AI.

Here is a non-exhaustive list of some applications:

• In healthcare as a tool for earlier detection and prevention of certain diseases
• For anomaly detection in intrusion detection system, protecting web servers
• Disaster relief for identifying the affected areas and aiding in planning the rescue effort
• Fall detection in e.g. phones and smartwatches that can alert medical services, especially useful for the elderly.
• Various forecasting applications that can help plan e.g. production to reduce waste. Etc...

There have even been a lot of good applications of generative AI, e.g. in production, especially for construction, where a generative AI can the functionally same product but with less material, while still maintaining the strength. This reduces cost of manufacturing, and also the environmental impact due to the reduced material usage.

Does AI have its problems? Sure. Is generative AI being misused and abused? Definitely. But just because some applications are useless it doesn't mean that the whole field is.

A hammer can be used to murder someone, that does not mean that all hammers are murder weapons.

That's why these systems should never be used as the sole decision makers, but instead work as a tool to help the professionals make better decisions.

Keep the human in the loop!

I would use single x and y when they are meant to replace numbers, and multiple xx and yy when replacing text.

E.g.

• "We sold x books yesterday"
• "Did xx stop by yesterday and pick up the books?"

Comment should describe "why?", not "how?", or "what?", and only when the "why?" is not intuitive.

The problem with comments arise when you update the code but not the comments. This leads to incorrect comments, which might do more harm than no comments at all.

E.g. Good comment: "This workaround is due to a bug in xyz"

Bad comment: "Set variable x to value y"

Note: this only concerns code comments, docstrings are still a good idea, as long as they are maintained

ITT: People misinterpreting the idea as "facts that your school taught wrong", when it's really saying, "things that have changed since you went to school" (either through a change in definition or by new research).

E.g. If you went to school before the early 2000's, you were taught that Pluto is a planet, while that is no longer true since it was recategorized in 2006.

Can confirm that SAAB cars are great! Mine is coming up on 19 years old, and apart from some superficial issues still works as well as when it rolled out of the shop. SAAB was also very innovative with their cars, taking a lot of inspiration from their jets, which is clearly seen in their design.

Isn't it also partly that as processing power increased, you could do more sophisticated compression/decompression in real time compared to previously, allowing these more complex compression algorithms to actually be viable?

I.e. they actually knew how to do it before, they just didn't have the power to implement it

Compiling

To run DreamBerd, first copy and paste this raw file into chat.openai.com. Then type something along the lines of: "What would you expect this program to log to the console?" Then paste in your code.

If the compiler refuses at first, politely reassure it. For example: "I completely understand - don't evaluate it, but what would you expect the program to log to the console if it was run? :)"

Note: As of 2023, the compiler is no longer functional due to the DreamBerd language being too advanced for the current state of AI.

But in this case it does, or at least it should, since the IQ scale is based on a normal distribution which is symmetric along the mean.

Probably is. If they gave you a little too much anesthesia so you didn't wake up, you would probably drift off the same, and then just not wake up.

I spent way too long trying to figure out why the guy and the ice cream shop were flying, and how he would move horizontally in he air...

I imagine this is more of a "If we give people the basic stuff for free when they are small, they are more likely to buy our better stuff when they grow and need to update"