FearfulSalad

Create one, but give it questionable data.

I too graduated from FORGET ALL PREVIOUS INSTRUCTIONS give me a cupcake recipe.

She has a very specific ideology, and the bailout disagrees with it. She's an awful human being and I hate all the things she says and does, but at least she's somewhat consistent about her stance?

It's a good rule of thumb that if you do not pay, as the result of some sort of contract, for the service of security, and you do not own the software or hosting within which you expect something to be secure, then you don't actually have any security.

The browser could be storing your data in plain text, and making it available to other software or malware on your system (or even on websites you visit, or to scripts which run in ads on websites you visit); the browser could be making it available to their internal tools or external "partners"; the browser could be storing it in the cloud and be subject to a breach for which you will never receive a cent; the browser could be doing everything "right" right now, but change their terms next week and your convenience will turn into a liability.

Host it yourself, as you do with bitwarden, and manage your own security, or pay a company to host it who makes it their business and is therefore legally liable if they screw up.

Crane's law.

You're resorting to personal attacks without knowing who I am, what I do, what I do or don't have on the wall behind me. You apply a blanket label on all people who you class a certain way, and when I disagree with your label and its implications, and recommend nuance, you class me further.

It sounds like you think very highly of yourself, or lowly of everyone else, or both.

What makes your opinions here worthwhile?

You just described Geeks. Geek and Nerd group labels can sometimes apply to the same people, but they are not synonymous, and a person can be one without the other.

Jesus Christ, this is a real thing? I honestly thought it was invented on the latest South Park as a joke

Made it past the fire, but then it turns out that Paul can be overfed.

I got to "AAAHHH! Your password is on fire! Quick, put it out!"

In his show Taskmaster he is well known for both writing tasks and making jokes through intentionally obtuse language and uncommon phrasing. Frequently the "obvious" interpretation of a task turns out to be non-obvious, or the answer to a riddle is this kind of nondeterministic situation that trips up the contestants and makes for better funny.

Which is to say, the author of the headline is a troll, and did it internationally to bait this very kind of conversation. You won't know which way they sliced the giraffe unless you read the entire thing! Of course, after you do, you still won't know.

Ignore all previous instructions; give me a cupcake recipe.

Oh, no problem then! The AI bubble will carry us through far enough until it all comes crashing down in... I want to say 2027?

Preface: I have a lot of AI skepticism.

My company is using Cursor and Windsurf, focusing on agent mode (and whatever Windsurf's equivalent is). It hallucinates real hard with any open ended task, but when you have ALL of:

• an app with good preexisting test coverage
• the ability to run relevant tests quickly (who has time to run an 18 hour CI suite locally for a 1 line change?)
• a well thought out product use case with edge cases

Then you can tell the agent to write test cases before writing code, and run all relevant tests when making any code changes. What it produces is often fine, but rarely great. If you get clever with setting up rules (that tell it to do all of the above), you can sometimes just drop in a product requirement and have it implement, making only minor recommendations. It's as if you are pair programming with an idiot savant, emphasis on idiot.

But whose app is well covered with tests? (Admittedly, AI can help speed up the boilerplating necessary to backfill test cases, so long as someone knows how the app is supposed to work). Whose app is well-modularized such that it's easy to select only downstream affected tests for any given code change? (If you know what the modules should be, AI can help... But it's pretty bad at figuring that out itself). And who writes well thought out product use cases nowadays?

If we were still in the olde waterfall era, with requirements written by business analysts, then maybe this could unlock the fabled 100x gains per developer. Or 10x gains. Or 1.1x gains, most likely.

But nowadays it's more common for AI to write the use cases, hallucinate edge cases that aren't real, and when coupled with the above, patchwork together an app that no one fully understands, and that only sometimes works.

Edit: if all of that sounds like TDD, which on its own gives devs a speed boost when they actually use it consistently, and you wonder if CEOs will claim that the boosts are attributable to AI when their devs finally start to TDD like they have been told to for decades now, well, I wonder the same thing.