Car manufacturers can focus on the hardware and building better cars, while customers benefit from a more uniform experience across different makes. Everybody wins.

Don't be stupid. Don't try to become something you're not! If software is only one aspect of your product, don't make it your product!

If a couple of car makers would collaborate by financing work on an open source Car OS, everybody would benefit. Eventually, the open source Car OS will be better and more stable than any closed-source competitor.

With cars, there are plenty of people who are scared of buying a new car because they've heard horror stories of cars disabled by software bugs. Even I, a tech enthusiast, would prefer to buy a dumb car. Probably because I know all too well how software development in big (car) companies goes.

You have nothing to gain and everything to lose in the software arena. You don't gain new customers with good software, but you're going to lose customers if your software is bad! And ultimately, the whole industry will suffer!

If you make cars, focus on making better cars. Leave software to software experts. Collaborate with your competition on the things that are not your core business. As a car maker, finance the work on an open source Car OS.

Welcome to the dark side! Currently building Burg Blaustein. Tempted to get something from Lumibricks next.

But personally, I feel like a hypocrite criticizing all the rich manchilds while using the products they build daily.

No matter what I do with AI, I end up with the realization that the "I" in AI is an exaggeration. The "Intelligence" in LLMs is nothing like human intelligence.

Yet I've had great success using agents with prompts like, "Here is how I've implemented X, please implement Y in the same way," or for refactoring tasks that can't be 100% automated by the IDE.

Ultimately, every single time I've tried to let an AI build something I'm planning to maintain for a long time, I've ended up throwing the LLM-generated code away and writing it myself, much simpler.

But what I find is that AI-generated code is anything but simple. This not only makes the code very hard for a human to debug, but the AI itself will also struggle to iterate on the code it has written.

I mean, coming from Google, it reads like a threat anyway.

Yeah but only if you’re very strict about scope of feature branches.

I’m a big fan of leaving the codebase a better place so I like to refactor code as I go and always having to create a separate branch for that is no fun..

Ideally, Git would automatically rebase quicksaves into end-of-level commits.

The original post said, "What does OpenAI offer the world?" implying that it is not.

I want to ban all cars from cities, and I don't drive either. 95% of the time. Yesterday, a mother in Austria rolled over her own infant. Tragic. Still, in 5% of the time, I acknowledge that driving is useful. And others even more so. This tragic incident and hundreds more daily do not change that.

But look, I don't even want to defend AI; I want to critique it, too. But in a way that makes the average Joe listen. Stating that it's useless when their experience is clearly the opposite will get us nowhere.

Okay, so you don't Google as well? Your only source of information is primary, peer-reviewed sources from libraries and trusted journals?

Okay, do you drive a car or take an Uber sometimes?