I guess that brings up the question of why do people use Codeberg in the first place. From what I understand, it's a decision based on values right rather than cost, functionality, or convenience. Well here you go, more values, enjoy!
After spending way too much time with Fable a few days ago, I noticed a new hallmark of AI generated text is using the word "honest" everywhere, in a somewhat self congratulating way.
Without it you likely would have been in the same quagmire, but just slower?
It could have taken you years to realize that "oh I'm just exploring stuff and have no output".
Set an ambitious goal that is achievable using Claude Code, and focus on delivering it. Even if it doesn't turn out to be a hit, the experience of releasing it and using AI to accelerate it, will be a talking point to your 10-year-older self.
Can someone please ELI5? I've heard much about it but still, with all the drama, I still don't get it.
SKG is an initiative that will force game publishers to keep a game online, provided that people have paid for it, and the publisher is not bankrupt? Is that right? What does it have to do with democracy?
From your post it's not clear that you understand how AWS charges. CloudWatch metrics would only validate your case if these were pay-per-use services like Lambdas or something. But you use the word "infrastructure" which implies you have allocated resources and simply don't use them. That's a valid charge.
Again maybe you are aware, but it wasn't clear from your post.
I don’t get the analogy because novel is supposed to be interesting. Code isn’t supposed to be interesting, it’s supposed to work.
If you’re writing novel algorithms all day, then I get your point. But are you? Or have you ever delegated work? If you find the AI losing its train of thought all it takes is to try again with better high level instructions.
> Do you spend days of your own time guiding them in person, do they just figure things out on their own after a few quarters of working on small tickets
It is this rather than docs. I think you're absolutely right about our lack of documentation handicapping AI agents.
At work, I have the same difficulty using AI as you. When working on deep Jiras that require a lot of domain knowledge, bespoke testing tools, but maybe just a few lines of actual code changes across a vast codebase, I have not been able to use it effectively.
For personal projects on the other hand, it has expedited me what? 10x, 30x? It's not measurable. My output has been so much more than what would have been possible earlier, that there is no benchmark because these level of projects would not have been getting completed in the first place.
Back to using at work: I think it's a skill issue. Both on my end and yours. We haven't found a way to encode our domain knowledge into AI and transcend into orchestrators of that AI.
> Hey, I'm not the OG commentator, why do I have to explain myself! :)
The issue is that you're not acknowledging or replying to people's explanations for _why_ they see this as exponential growth. It's almost as if you skimmed through the meat of the comment and then just re-phrased your original idea.
> When Fernando Alonso (best rookie btw) goes from 0-60 in 2.4 seconds in his Aston Martin, is it reasonable to assume he will near the speed of light in 20 seconds?
This comparison doesn't make sense because we know the limits of cars but we don't yet know the limits of LLMs. It's an open question. Whether or not an F1 engine can make it the speed of light in 20 seconds is not an open question.
It’s immeasurable. I use AI for powering through personal projects, which would not have gotten done without AI because I also have a job and a life. It allows me to focus on the product and requirements rather than the code. It’s hard to measure because the projects would simply not have gotten done without it.