I read the article (not the study only the abstract) and they were getting paid an hourly rate. It did not mention anything about whether or not they had expirence in using llms to code. I feel there is a sweet spot, has to do with context window size etc.
I was not consistently better a year and a half ago but now i know the limits caveats and methods.
I think this is a very difficult thing to quantify but haters gonna latch on to this, same as the study that said “ai makes you stupid” and “llms cant reason”… its a cool tool that has limits.
“Your team is trained to recognize phishing emails, but can they spot a fake voice?”
Weirdly enough I’ve found it much easier to print on linux. It just works out of the box.
If it doesn’t it is definetly the printers manufacturer fault 😅
Haha if im not mistaken this might be about that guy saying wtf github why no exe? I’m sure someone has the link.
I don't know about you but I was just waiting for an excuse. I ain't ever going back. It's a brave new world for me, part of shifting my whole suite to FOSS. Leaving the old internet behind me.
Now imagine moving there as a foreigner from a normal country and someone telling you their phone number! It's like having a micro stroke.
No we can not. This is fucked up. It's one rich guy's hobby:
sturlabragason
0 post score0 comment score
The study did find a correlation between prior experience and performance. One of the developers who showed a positive speedup with AI was the one with the most previous experience using Cursor (over 50 hours).