Most non technical people I know asked questions to Google even before the AI overview. Instead of looking for the answer in seo-bloated articles, they find it in the overview.

I think google should improve in detecting the kind of query when I need a link that I don't remember, and deactivate the overview on those. If I search for "ryanair booking" I clearly need the url for booking a Ryanair flight, AI overview is useless

Most of the time I'm looking for something very specific that there are plenty of articles about, but clicking on the articles results in popups, banners and an unhealthy amount of scrolling to get to the answer.

AI overview provides me the answer instantly.

Think about suff like "does china borders afghanistan". In those cases you can be confident that the AI overview is right, and saved you time.

If it is a complex or niche question I tend not to trust the overview and go straight for legitimate-looking results

In other cases the content is at easily guessable path, and that is a whole different story

How is the Microsoft Office compatibility managed by these tools? There is a popular SDK providing the compatibility? I can't imagine everyone reimplementing the full compatibility layer

Very cool anyway! Can I expect a youtube video about this soon?

Bitwarden vaults were not compromised, there was a problem in a tool you used to access the secrets.

What makes it impossible for KeePass access tools to have these issues?

It is pure speculation of course, but I don't have any other explanations on the stuff they are pulling in the last 2 months.

I just write my text without too much thought about it and I get a rewritten version that is usually clearer, but not pedantic or overly verbose.

It particular helps for English text as it is not my first language

I understand your feelings but it is extremely tipical in human history to keep remembering "the good old times"

Claude code is simply considered the best agentic tool, not the only one lol

yes, their business plans was always to engage a lot of users losing VC money until you are a platform with enough moat to add monetization. It was the plan all along

It is the plan for plenty of startups: when it works you become a tech giant, otherwise you fail and no one knows you

One email, with the receipt and the tracking number is enough for me, everything else is just noise to me.

I totally agree that it is not an important problem: it is a nitpick, but that is why I think it is a problem.

I agree that someone may misunderstand their phrasing though

Specifications accurate enough to describe the exact behaviors are basically equivalent to code, also in terms of length, so you basically just change language (and current LLM tech is not on course to be able to handle such big specifications)

Higher level specifications (the ones that make sense) leave some details and assumption to the implementation, so you can not safely ignore the implementation itself and you cannot recreate it easily (each LLM build could change the details and the little assumptions)

So yeah, while I agree that documentation and specifications are more and more important in the AI world, I don't see the path to the conclusions you are drawing

If you setup your skeleton in a way it is familiar to you, reviewing new features afterwards is easier.

If you let the LLM start with the skeleton, they may use different patterns and in the long run it's harder to keep track of it.

Isn't this the point of the whole conversation we are having here?

Laws on copyright were not created for current AI usage on open source project replication.

They need to change, because if they are perfectly enforced by the letter, they result in actions that are clearly against the intent of the law itself.

The underlying problem is that the world changes too fast for the laws so be fair immediately