Pennomi

If they fixed their damn payment processor I’d buy it. I’ve tried several methods and they all fail.

Sorry that’s the only way. I don’t make the rules.

Play a Pokémon game

They are saying it’s redundant, and therefore unnecessary.

Well, worst case scenario someone can fork it.

And honestly lightweight neural nets can make for some interesting enemy behavior as well. I’ve seen a couple games using that and wouldn’t be surprised if it caught on in the future.

“Legally” doesn’t mean shit if it’s not enforceable. Besides, removing watermarks is trivial.

There is no technically rigorous way to filter AI content, unfortunately.

Indeed, the art is the reverse heist.

Yes, at one point.

Yet another reason I abandoned Unity. They’re clearly in the “pillage and burn” phase of capitalism.

Thank god, otherwise how would we cope with that stupid sexy Withers?

OK sure if you want to be pedantic. The point is that LLMs can do things traditional code generators can’t.

You don’t have to like it or use it. I myself am very vocal about the weaknesses and existential dangers of AI code. It’s going to cause the worst security nightmares in humanity’s recorded history. I recommend to companies that they DON’T trust LLMs for their coding because it creates unmaintainable nightmares of spaghetti code.

But pretending that they have NO advantages over traditional code generators is utter silliness perpetuated by people who refuse to argue in good faith.

I think you underestimate the amount of business logic contained in boilerplate. (Or maybe we’re just talking about different definitions of what boilerplate is). LLMs can understand that business need while most code generators cannot.

You’re focused too much on the “inventing” and not enough on the “one time”. A flexible solution can find value even if it’s otherwise inferior to a rigid one.

Or even distinguish between two versions of the same library. Absolutely stupid that LLMs default to writing deprecated code just because it was more common in the training data.

No, but the business requirements obviously are. Code does not exist in a vacuum.

Sure, I’ve used that too in the past.

I honestly don’t think such a generic tool is possible, at least in a Django context. The boilerplate is about as minimal as is possible while still maintaining the flexibility to build anything.

Because it’s not worth inventing a whole tool for a one-time use. Maybe you’re the kind of person who has to spin up 20 similar Django projects a year and it would be valuable to you.

But for the average person, it’s far more efficient to just have an LLM kick out the first 90% of the boilerplate and code up the last 10% themself.

Sure but it’s a lot less flexible. As much hate as they get, LLMs are the best natural language processors we have. By FAR.