>GPT‑5.2 sets a new state of the art across many benchmarks, including GDPval, where it outperforms industry professionals at well-specified knowledge work tasks spanning 44 occupations.

We built a benchmark tool that says our newest model outperforms everyone else. Trust me bro.

>Vibe coding makes me feel dirty in ways that I struggle to articulate precisely. It’s not just that it feels like 'cheating'(though it does). I also think it takes a lot of the fun out of the whole thing.

This exactly. Programming is art, because it comes from the soul. You can tackle a problem a million ways, but there's only one way that YOU would solve it.

Vibe coding feels like people who aren't creative, stealing everyone's creativity, and then morphing it into something they find appealing.

There is no skill.

There is no talent.

You are asking the machine to do ALL THE THINKING. All the little decisions, the quirks, the bugs, the comments to yourself. All the things that make a piece of code unique.

Oh man, that's totally worth $500 Billion dollars and the environmental health of our towns and cities!

Nobody has yet to explain how an LLM can be better than a well paid human expert.

The not needing to pay it well.

A well paid human expert can find lots of uses of LLMs. I'm still not convinced that humans will ever be totally replaced, and what work will look like is human experts using LLMs as another tool in the toolbox, just like how an engineer would have used a slide rule or mechanical calculator back in the day. The kind of work they're good at doesn't cover the full range of necessary engineering tasks, but they do open up new avenues. For instance, yesterday I was able to get the basic gist of three solutions for a pretty complex task in about an hour. The result of that was me seeing that two of them were unlikely to work for what I'm doing, so that now I can invest actual effort in the third solution.

Tools can make individuals and teams more effective. This is just as true for LLM-based tools as it was for traditional ones.

The question is not whether one (1) LLM can replace one (1) expert.

Rather, it is how much farther an expert can get through better tooling. In my experience, it can be pretty far indeed.

Every other day its "China creates a breakthrough that was never thought possible" and "America shits in hand; Claps."

At least in this case it's somewhat sensationalized because the US did this in the 1950’s and concluded that it was more economical and simpler to use mined Uranium instead of breeding with Thorium.

You should not be feeding your medical records into ChatGPT.

And you shouldn't be using Gmail or Google Search. At some point the benefits outweigh the costs.

How does an email service compare to a glorified if-then machine that hordes all your data?

Why not?

I can imagine a few different reasons you might have, but I don't want to guess.

Anti-AI bias is motivated by the waste of natural resources due to a handful of non-technical douchebag tech bros.

Everything isn't about money, I know that status and power are all you ai narcissists dream about. But you'll never be Bill Gates, nor will you be Elon Musk.

Once ai has gone the way of "Web3", "NFTs", "blockchain", "3D tvs", etc; You'll find a new grift to latch your life savings onto.

HA!

I've worked at MULTIPLE million dollar firms whose entire business relies on 10 Excel workbooks that were created 30 years ago by a person who is either passed on or retired.

Give users who aren't intimately knowledgeable with their source material ai, and you're asking for trouble.

The undo function has a history limit.

The real issue is: at what point are we going to stop chasing efficiency and profit at the sake of humanity?

Claude and OpenAI are built on stretched truths, stolen creativity and what-if statements.

So you'll never need to remember anything. ChatGPT remembers that PH video from 10 months ago AND the improved recipe for your mom's pasta sauce.

In all seriousness: they won't make a dent in the browser market, people still using GPT resources for free, and if they do start ads why would a company work with a company that's already hemorrhaging billions?

If you stop thinking (a tough ask for ai users, I know) about this from a never-ending money perspective and live in the real world, financially and environmentally it's gonna take decades to undo the damage. All for what?

(explodes before it can reach)SpaceX is just as rushed as Boeing is. I wouldn't trust Sean Duffy to successfully watch paint dry, let alone anything space related.