Not to mention the adversarial risk. Prompt injection, LLM-maximized advertising, and just common scams are going to take so much money if these catch on.

Running code through a deterministic formatter definitely helps a lot, but I've generally found LLMs' comments to add no-to-negative value. They just say what code does, typically very verbosely that just inflates files more while also just stating the most obvious aspects of the code and not adding any meaning behind it because they obviously don't know that. Not to the mention all the cases where they make mistakes and then you have code you don't intuitively understand and also have comments telling you it does something it doesn't.

Or worse, the comments are a tutorial through the changes for your review, referring to something that now doesn't exist because of the changes you're making. Less than informative, literally backwards facing.

But that's what stackoverflow looks like.

Rulings have said that reproduction of AI models which were trained on copyrighted material are not violating the copyright on those materials. The initial copying of those materials without paying is illegal regardless. You still have to buy or otherwise legally view a copy of the book/movie/photo to train your model on it.

Not quite.

If the materials were publicly available on a site and scraped? Fair use.

If they were distributed illegally and acquired through that distribution? Cooked.

If you scraped it AND saved it? Cooked.

Yeah, sorry, I tried to imply that. Publicly available on a website is included in "otherwise legally view".

I think everyone here is well aware of what LLMs can do. He's just pointing out how far short that falls of being some theoretical "AGI".

That... has an i in it?

Someone whose last name is Oppenheimer should also not have a problem registering their last name at any TLD so long as it's still available (first come first serve, and both have a reasonable claim to it so it won't be taketh away from either one), much less if yours is actually a different word

Video on it from the creator: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqPARIKHbN8

The UI is pretty similar. It's very intuitive for someone used to Paint.NET. Pinta definitely satisfies my desire for Paint.NET on Linux.

Pinta is obviously not as capable, but yeah, it's by far the most usable general-purpose photo editor on Linux that I've found.

It says something that an old paint.net derivative is still the best general purpose image editor out there. (I consider GIMP harder and slower to use.)

Neat idea, but feels very poorly made.

The light direction governs the whole grid for some reason but stops outside an arbitrary div and often just stops working period, on top of feeling laggy for such a simple effect.

Channels are messed up. The example doesn't seem to work, while in the video it just makes two edges white for some reason?

The color options and textures are kinda ugly. The glass colors clearly just don't work. "Brass" turns into "Olive" on the last one for no reason?

The radio buttons are a bad idea for a digital interface, implemented completely inconsistently(‽), and the middle one just doesn't work at all.

Buttons have virtually no feedback if they're pressed or not.

Reminds me a lot of Google's material design, at least the older versions of it, just much sloppier and less usable and less colorful.

It supports a dark theme but then you can't see 90% of what it actually does because drop shadows on dark backgrounds just plain don't work.

And knobs are a useless control on in any mouse/pointer based interface.

It’s also glitchy and flickery for me on iOS.

Percentages aren't always the right gauge. uv isn't something I run frequently or for long periods of time. It's like a couple seconds every month or whatever. I would rather spend an extra second waiting every year to have hundreds more megabytes all the time.

When actively developing Python projects, running uv a dozen times per hour isn't unusual. Those seconds add up fast. Whereas freed disk space remains unused.

warm cache case is only imperceptibly slower, no?

True, haven't read the source and only went by what the other commenter said. But one could argue 500MB more free space is similarly imperceptible.

There are still many environments with <=250GB, below that I wouldn't call it negligible. And let's not forget that the price per GB has appreciated a LOT!

They're likely the same environments that can't keep warm cache in memory, so the performance penalties are higher too.

You could reverse the last sentence to "freed disk space reduces the need to clean the hd". And I don't even mean physical limitation as much as the compulsion to manually clean ballooning cache dirs once in a while.

Overprovisioning also reduces the need to clean the disk. I've had a terabyte Macbook for over a year, developing in 7 different tech stacks simultaneously, never cleaning anything up manually, and I still have over 60% space left.

It's a tradeoff between wasting a little time everyday vs. wasting equally little time every year or so but also having the mental load of cleaning up plus maybe existential dread vs. spending more money to never have either problem. I do understand the last one isn't an option for everyone, but if it is, it's absolutely worth it.