Post #1468630
2026-02-17 17:15 UTC
@Njord From my experimenting, I would say that AI is "good" at taking something that already exists and using it to produce something of similar length or shorter (e.g. writing documentation or simple unit tests for existing code, translating or proofreading text, etc.). It's "bad" at creating new things that are larger than the input prompt (e.g. "vibe coding," art, video). And both of these are just likely outcomes, so you can get bad outcomes out of the tasks it's "good" at and vice-versa.
Replies (1)
-
@curtmack@floss.social 2026-02-17 17:19
@Njord There's probably more nuance to be had in terms of *exactly* when AI is more likely than not to break down (e.g. the more complex your code, the more likely it is to write unit tests that don't work), but I don't care *that* much about understanding the Unethical Grift Machine.