a recent attempt to rewrite SQLite in Rust using AI. “It passed all the unit tests, the shape of the code looks right,” he said. It’s 3.7x more lines of code that performs 2,000 times worse than the actual SQLite. Two thousand times worse for a database is a non-viable product. It’s a dumpster fire. Throw it away. All that money you spent on it is worthless."

Insurers, he said, are already lobbying state-level insurance regulators to win a carve-out in business insurance liability policies so they are not obligated to cover AI-related workflows. “That kills the whole system,” Deeks said. Smiley added: “The question here is if it’s all so great, why are the insurance underwriters going to great lengths to prohibit coverage for these things? They’re generally pretty good at risk profiling.”

  • Mwa@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Tbh I see myself using AI for shits and giggles. (nothing helpful)
    I try not to use it alot due to the ethics it comes with it.

    • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      In fairness to LLMs, (which I run locally) I’ve been able to use them for like, bits of code that are roughly 200 lines or less.

      Or like, feed it a code base and say hey, make sure all the comments are formatted the same way.

      But uh, for… trying to engineer an entire system?

      Nope nope nope, they get very confused, very fast, as overall conplexity increases.