375 karma · joined September 6, 2019
https://chatgpt.com/share/68282eb2-e53c-8000-853f-9a03eee128...
I don't think it's possible to generate an acceptable story without reasoning.
That is not to say that I disagree with you. I would prefer to read human authors even if the AI was great at writing stories, because there's something alluring about getting a glimpse into a world that somebody else created in their head.
fn actualLogic(param, param, param) ...
switch (some Condition) { case a: actualLogic(Foo, bar) ; case b: actualLogic(bar, Foo) ; ... }
It might be expressed with if statements, pattern matching, function calls etc., but most of the code is boilerplate.
From my experience in a C# codebase most of the code which completes correctly is this boilerplate.
O3/Sonnet/Gemini are able to write actual logic in chat/agent mode sometimes but then the problem is that they rewrite too much, which would count as AI generated code.
These two factors probably play a huge role in the 30% if it's counted in any accurate way.
It's also hard to dictate code without a lot of these commands because it's very dense in information.
I hope something else will be the solution. Maybe LLMs being smart enough to guess the code out of a very short description and then a set of corrections.
How are you so certain about a phenomenon not existing when you have no idea about it? Do you apply the same filters to everything else you don't understand?
Also be careful with wishing for "progress" to be rolled back. First it's other peoples' freedom to live their lives how they want to and then it's yours.
Left recursion causes rules to be ambiguous. In `<S> | a`, it's always ambiguous if the input has ended. Thus the data structure that would be traversed can be a circular graph. In `<S> := a | <S>, S := ε', the rules are unambiguous and the data structure that is traversed has the shape of a tree.
You get precedence rules by defining the shape of this tree, thus which rules will be visited before which.
However it doesn't have to be strict precedence. Some rules can have an ambiguous order as long as the execution still follows the shape of a tree.
For example, in my simple rule above, it doesn't matter if you visit the ε rule or the other rule first in your implementation (although it's less efficient to visit ε first).
So, I think precedence is a side-effect of doing this transformation.
In this case, she's talking about her preferences which can be any identity, sex etc.
For example, a trans person may prefer to date other trans people because they will have more common experiences and there will be less explaining if how things work on their body etc. Others might have preferences based on primary or secondary sex characteristics. Others may only date people who like a specific type of cheese.
Example: https://instantusername.com
I've seen quite personal details being leaked because sometimes even smart people don't realise how easy it is to cross-reference given a unique username.