Their whole strategy is selling luxury cars in China, without an afterthought on what might happen if that market changes in any way. Now, they don't know what to do. At the same time, they destroyed their image. Instead of being the most reliable car, they transformed themselves in a luxury brand.
Before I read your comment, I had no idea they were once considered reliable cars (until the 90s?). I remember people mocking their reliability issues and owners groaning about repair costs for the last 25 years.
For a long time the Mercedes E class was the taxis car. Reliable as hell. There was also a saying akin to "the last car will be a mercedes", meaning the last car you buy in life will be a mercedes because it will outlast you. That changed heavily in the late 90s and 00s.
> I can't help but think this was influenced somewhat by the shutdown of Germany's nuclear reactors thus making energy more expensive and all the knock on effects.
The shutdown had no effect on energy prices in Germany.
I started with Godot, and swtich back to Pascal. It will be and is cross platform, but I am focusing on Linux, because that is what I use.
With regards to Godot, while I like it, when using my own engine I can take a lot of shortcusts that Godot cannot. For example, I am able to save a lot of computational logic on reflections by making the requirements that reflections only world on right angled surfaces, which is fine for a pinball table. Also, I am able to cheap out with lighting using a my ouwn techniques for generating lighting maps in a shader, something that is hard to pull off with Godot.
This other game project of mine is written using Godot and C#:
It starts as a case-of-the-week type of show with a bit of AI backstory before it changes in the later season to a more overarching plot. I think this is one of the reasons it became so good, because it eased you in.
I get a lot of obviously wrong or slightly wrong answers from all LLMs across the board. If you don't double-check you just don't know or you might miss it.
And for the bleeding edge part: My godchild wanted to know the name of a Pokémon from his licensed shirt. One of the first ones, found in every training set. Couldn't get it right, was certain it was the wrong one.
> wanted to know the name of a Pokémon from his licensed shirt.
how did you even ask an AI this question? Took a picture of the shirt, uploaded it, and asked the AI what it was? That's a different class of problem than "answer this graph theory question and include your references: "
Who is to judge? From my perspective i see everyone else walking in a wrong direction. And from theirs probably me plus everyone else. The outcome will only be known in the future. The system adapts. For some it works, for others it doesnt. That's democracy. Got to live with what is maybe not in my interest, when other people vote for their own and are a majority. That's why people leave countries and hopefully find other places.
This hasn't yet been decided, as I pointed out above. The courts have indicated that push button LLM output is not copyrightable, but haven't said anything about larger orchestrations of multiple agents operating over hours or days to produce something with direction from a human.
Given that photographs are copyrightable, I wouldn't hold my breath on projects like this being deemed ineligible for copyright.
> In the copyright law in the United States, such copyright may exist when the materials in the compilation (or "collective work") are selected, coordinated, or arranged creatively such that a new work is produced. Copyright does not exist when content is compiled without creativity, such as in the production of a telephone directory. In the case of compilation copyright, the compiler does not receive copyright in the underlying material, but only in the selection, coordination, or arrangement of that material.
All my experience seeing orgs ship real production code with the assistance of AI over months/many-thousands-of-commits shows that the skill not only lies in what context you choose to provide in the first place (product and technical specifications, design guidelines, prompting process with the model(s)), but also in how to effectively review and test all of it, which is still done with human direction throughout. This is why people with no experience in coding can't do with AI what an industry veteran with 20 years shipping to production can.
In any case, I think existing reading of copyright law will be sufficient to say that large AI-driven software projects are a process of orchestration and also of curation in selecting what actually gets committed (or, if commit-by-default is enabled, then what to revert). This may not always be true in the future, though, as capabilities increase...one part of me thinks you could just do random stuff like "Make me an excel except every cell is a powerpoint presentation" and a good enough AI would reason through and produce something without further input. But I think in most cases, folks have a real set of requirements in mind, and get all of them into the AI through a process of iteration in various ways. I think that's real work that requires skill and, in many cases, creativity, at least in the sense that someone else walking up to the same tool and prompting on their own would produce a very different output than you'd see if you asked the same person to retry the same project.
I don't think we disagree that much. But the repo in question had basically no human input, at least no substantial one. It will be interesting where the courts will decide the boundary lies though.
reply