It’s path down the hill was algorithmically determined but it’s actually a black box so I can’t tell you why it followed the path it did at all actually.

It‘s so disheartening to see intelligent and somewhat tech savvy people around me buy into it. They treat these things almost like they‘re living beings and offload more of their own thinking capacity to chatbots. No amount of explaining how this is just one of countless publicity stunts can convince them. They‘re acting like I‘m the one who just doesn‘t understand technology while they‘re letting word salad influence how they think or even IF they think.

To be fair, talking to a chatbot like it’s a human, is a very effective way of getting the most useful responses out of them.

For casual conversations, maybe. But for actual computing tasks, it’s more effective to outline prompts and give it direct instructions without fluff.

Yes, without fluff and strict outlines, best is an actual template… But the prompts you give, are most easily given as if you’re talking to a 20 yo junior. Or maybe even better a 10 yo junior.

and providing you take into account that it cannot plan ahead for contingencies or consider negative possible outcomes. they have no sense of the past or the future, existing entirely within the moment of a prompt.

I learned that. But Arch has an image of being super high maintenance and hard to install, like compiling linux back in the day. Totally invalid image, but it still persists. Anyways, I’m gonna try archinstall in my summer vacation.

Not the actual task or code, but the chat interface is useful for brainstorming.