felbane

This is one of those rare situations where reading the fucking manual article helps:  A standard home charger trickles power overnight at roughly 7 kilowatts, like a garden hose. A Tesla Supercharger—long considered the gold standard of public fast-charging—maxes out around 250 kilowatts. BYD is unleashing six times that amount of energy, effectively hooking the car up to a high-pressure municipal water main. During a live demonstration onstage, BYD plugged in its new Han L sedan, making the battery jump from 10% to 80% capacity in exactly six minutes and 30 seconds.

Wait until he learns that physics is just applied mathematics

How hilarious would it be if the AMD board member was the one who veto’d the driver 😅

Auditing the code it produces is basically the only effective way to use coding LLMs at this point. You’re basically playing the role of senior dev code reviewing and editing a junior dev’s code, except in this case the junior dev randomly writes an amalgamation of mostly valid, extremely wonky, and/or complete bullshit code. It has no concept of best practices, or fitness for purpose, or anything you’d expect a junior dev to learn as they gain experience. Now given the above, you might ask yourself: “Self, what if I myself don’t have the skills or experience of a senior dev?” This is where vibe coding gets sketchy or downright dangerous: if you don’t notice the problems in generated code, you’re doomed to fail sooner or later. If you’re lucky, you end up having to do a big refactoring when you realize the code is brittle. If you’re unlucky, your backend is compromised and your CTO is having to decide whether to pay off the ransomware demands or just take a chance on restoring the latest backup. If you’re just trying to slap together a quick and dirty proof of concept or bang out a one-shot script to accomplish a task, it’s fairly useful. If you’re trying to implement anything moderately complex or that you intend to support for months/years, you’re better off just writing it yourself as you’ll end up with something stylistically cohesive and more easily maintainable.

As someone who has been shoved in the direction of using AI for coding by my superiors, that’s been my experience as well. It’s fine at cranking out stackoverflow-level code regurgitation and mostly connecting things in a sane way if the concept is simple enough. The real breakthrough would be if the corrections you make would persist longer than a turn or two. As soon as your “fix-it prompt” is out of the context window, you’re effectively back to square one. If you’re expecting it to “learn” you’re gonna have a bad time. If you’re not constantly double checking its output, you’re gonna have a bad time.