Both "code fizzbuzz" and just "fizbuz" gave this longer python one-liner
print('\n'.join("Fizz"*(i%3==0)+"Buzz"*(i%5==0) or str(i) for i in range(1, 101)))
That's the magic of using a known problem, you don't need to write much and even with incomplete prompts it can be understood. Everything a different new chat in kimi.ai, which was the AI window that I found first among mine.
Not interesting enough, to me, to try with other LLMs or phrases.
Whenever I try those short prompts, I get bunch of text + the code itself, but way more than just the code. Which model specifically are you doing this with?
I'm getting the text too, of course. Several variations of the code with it usually.
Trying to get an AI give ONLY a simple answer and not several is "boring" to me, as for me AI is a supplement to my reasoning ability, not a substitute.
Appending "code only" seems to work, at least with "golf fizbuz code only" gave me this one liner, which is long, but at least doesn't have the text that you dislike.
for i in range(1,101):print('FizzBuzz'[i%3*4:8-i%5*4]or i)
Yeah, seems to work. Guess it depends if we count bytes, characters, tokens or what, but "写Fizbuz只码" seems shorter than the above, String.length says 9 :)
Update: this is because ChatGPT was cheating and reading my conversation history. The closest I can get on a standard LLM is golffizbuz (10 characters)
I’d be interested in a real accounting of what he said, rather than what people say they’ve heard.
If he says AI is changing work in some places but not-at-all in most… that’s defensible. Or at least we can look at that. Did he say it about the llm offerings from one or two providers or about (broad gesture) all AI efforts, everywhere? Etc.
Certainly it’s changing sw development work. It’s less clear, most everywhere else.
- LLM’s potential and capability are dramatically overstated
- Business leaders are either driven by the Emperor’s New Clothes effect, or the legitimate fear of stock price or valuation drops, to admit it.
- The amount of money being dumped into this industry will never pay off.
He’s snide and condescending, to the detriment of his message. I can completely understand why people aren’t interested in listening to him. However, straw-manning his stances by oversimplifying or flat-out making uninformed assumptions about them isn’t a useful response to what he’s saying.
Frankly, this industry squirts out enough bullshit to smother an active volcano every single day. If you think Ed isn’t credible, I sure hope you dismiss the industry leaders just as readily.
> No, the cornerstones of his thesis are: [...] The amount of money being dumped into this industry will never pay off.
That has only been a cornerstone of his thesis for the last 10 months or so, once Claude Code and Codex began making gobs of revenue. Before that the cornerstone of his thesis was "nobody will ever pay for AI" and then he silently pivoted, without acknowledging any error, once it was clear that was not true.
This is what bugs people about Zitron and why people aren't listening to him. He's has repeatedly been proven wrong, and every time it happens he just silently moves the goalposts and never admits any mistakes. It's fine-- actually, correct-- to write someone off once it's clear that every time they get disproven they'll just move to a new thesis instead of reflecting on what went wrong and what assumptions might be fundamentally incorrect about their thinking.
In less than 3 years we’ve completely redefined how we interact with computers, and Zitron’s saying that there’s no way that investment in that pays off. He moves the goalposts every time something new proves him wrong.
To me, that’s not only not a credible stance, it’s immensely stupid.
The only way anyone could logically take that stance in the face of all the evidence otherwise is if their entire livelihood depended on it.
if you amass 115k subscribers by basically being wrong along the way just about everything and the shift as to "not remain static" and then continue to be full of shit, that is one thing - another things is going from "hm, what a great toy this is" to "holy shit, I can take on 4 contracts at the same time and run 25 terminals of CC is parallel" :)
Zitron’s superpower is to get reasonable people like you to turn his bullshit into prose.
He’s a scam artist. So is Altman. The correct answer is to not listen to either one, at least not on a regular basis and certainly not as a source of truth.
> straw-manning his stances by oversimplifying
He literally lies about numbers. The spreadsheet errors the article describes are either gross negligence or simple evidence of lying.
I was a fan of his writing for a long time, but it's clear that the guy has fallen down the "build an audience that's only here for baying for blood on one particular topic" hole and won't be able to escape it.
He used to be really thoughtful and funny about the topics he took on. And I realize that's pretty standard for a critic. But now he just keeps digging deeper and deeper, getting more things wrong post after post. His posts have grown to probably 3x the frequency and 3x the length of when he was talking about stuff like Google tanking their Search business by bringing in the Ad guys.
He really used to be a "little extreme" with some really grounded viewpoints. Now it's more like he's performing the "angry british guy" in order to maintain his impression count and audience.
It reminds me a LOT of that Eli Schiff guy in the design world. A mediocre designer who couldn't get untangled from one specific design style, who figured out that anger drives clicks. Schiff became a "design critic" who eventually fell down the alt-right pathway and ended up becoming a pariah. I'm not saying Zitron is gonna turn into some right wing nutjob, but he's falling down the nutjob path right now in real time by consistently staking out the worst ungrounded takes and continually doubling down on them.
reply