I did nazi that coming.

Obviously, if it's just slop, or totally not you, then don't send it, no matter who made it.

But if it's just a tool to polish a bit? So what?

Yeah, I'd just hate to hire someone who uses tools to help accomplish goals. "Og no need flint to start fire!"

What is this "trust" everybody keeps talking about?

We don't "trust" human -generated code either; we have QA processes.

His point is, software is now easier to produce. Free software included.

No guarantee that it will be good - but there is no guarantee of that now either. How good any bit of it will be depends on the level of QA it goes through - just like it depends on that now.

... for something I am told so constantly is so doomed.

You'd think the usual suspects would consider that a plus ...

Also, I thought that even supreme court justices didn't know what males or females were?

Fuck me, another person who doesn't know how tariffs work.

Those Alpha Centurions, they're eating the cats! They're eating the dogs!

> "Good enough" is exactly the reason that AI is upending the world of white collar work. It might not replace a skilled and experienced employee, but it's good enough.

I don't necessarily have a problem with that. The problem is, skilled workers only become skilled after being inexperienced for a while and gaining experience. If you cut junior, unskilled workers from the job market, you won't have skilled workers in a few years.

In other words, company that adopt AI to avoid paying unskilled labor are shooting themselves in the foot.

Too true.

Heck, over twenty years ago I used VBA with Excel, Word, and Adobe to automate something that one guy spent an entire day doing once a week. Replaced with a one click of a button.

This must be talking point #2, right under the super plausible "Republicans want to disenfranchise married women" ...

Whether you like AI or not, if your profession is about to be obsoleted by AI, AI Is factually bad for you.

Beyond that, it's up to you to decide if it's worth paying a talented human writer to report on local events in a local rag. Most of those newspapers are strictly utilitarian and simply inform the locals of what's happening in their communities. I've never seen any of them dabble in gonzo.

And well, journalism is like football: most professional footballers play in minor leagues and don't earn much, and only a vanishingly small minority earns top dollar playing incredible matches watched by millions.

High-flying journalists writing for classy newspapers will most certainly keep writing their own stuff. But the mundane will probably be taken over by AI because mediocre is good enough for the money.

Whachu talkin' about Willis? Getting rid of a ruling class has been automated* since 1792.


* well, partially.

I should have written "90% of people have the SAME abnormal thing". I've been thoroughly out-pedanted. Well done Sir :)

If 99% of people have something abnormal, isn't it in fact the norm?