this post was submitted on 01 May 2025
-2 points (0.0% liked)

Technology

78002 readers
2219 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] anus@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Thank you for your considered and articulate comment

What do you think about the significant difference in attitude between comments here and in (quite serious) programming communities like https://lobste.rs/s/bxixuu/cheat_sheet_for_why_using_chatgpt_is_not

Are we in different echo chambers? Is chatgpt a uniquely powerful tool for programmers? Is social media a fundamentally Luddite mechanism?

[–] Vanth@reddthat.com 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I'm curious if you can articulate the difference between being critical of how a particular technology is owned and managed versus being a Luddite?

[–] Rooki@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I would say GitHub copilot ( that uses a gpt model ) uses more Wh than chatgpt, because it gets blasted more queries on average because the "AI" autocomplete just triggers almost every time you stop typing or on random occasions.

[–] anus@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I don't think this answers the question

[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I don’t think this answers the question

They're specifically showing you that in the use case you asked about the assertions must change. Your question is bad for the case that you're specifically asking about.

So no, it doesn't answer the question... But your question has a bunch more caveats that must be accounted for that you're just straight up missing.

[–] anus@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No that is not how reasoned debate works, you have to articulate your argument lest you're just sloppily babbling talking points

[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 1 points 7 months ago

If the premise of your argument is fundamentally flawed, then you're not having a reasoned debate. You just a zealot.