It is probably why sales of things like self-help books are collapsing.

Genres where ghost writing is a already a big part of it and where authors routinely publish multiple books a year might end up incorporating AI more but right now you’d have to lie to readers to do it.

The component that I believe AI researchers miss is the parasocial relationship.

The way I personally remember it being positioned was “Vim, but with breaking changes.”

The fact that they believed this is legally useful because of the definition of fair use, so I see why the Author’s Guild is emphasizing it, but the authors I know don’t talk about it. They’re very angry about their work having been used without compensation to create the model, but not because they think it can replace them.

Whenever I’ve seen AI researchers talk about the possibility of AI writing fiction they always sound very confused about why people read novels.

Lots of comments talking about how recent accomplishments disprove the article but I think this bit holds up pretty well.

LLMs are very good at tricking people into thinking they have capabilities that they don’t.

True!

> and cut their velocity in half

That’s not how pair programming works.

It scales fine to 400+ engineers. You do have to be willing to hire specifically for pairing tolerance.

This sentence is extremely funny in the context of actual ethnographic research on “indigenous anarchy.”

Gotta catch that stuff early.

git add . -N

And then review the text itself as part of the git add -p workflow

It is irritating that people expect you to understand what reasonable personal sharing is without explaining explicitly and goodness knows I screwed this up when I was younger but “don’t talk about your personal life at all” is bad advice.

You should talk to someone who works at Patreon. Or a larger creator on their platform.

Last I heard they also do their own payment processing, which is a substantial technical problem.