The humans doing this job are going to be paid so bad and will have to review so much content that I don’t think they will perform any better than the current bots.

And they probably will have to deal with the stress and blame when something escapes from their review process.

Edit so I’m not misunderstood: I’m not against human review in this (and other cases) but we have to have in mind that this kind of job SUCKS and content moderators on Facebook (contractors really) already had problems with PTSD (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/dec/18/kenya-facebook-moderators-sue-after-diagnoses-of-severe-ptsd).

Why did they stop there and didn’t include a few rolls of duct tape on the nose bridge to be extra nerdy?

That’s Musk

We started to use ad blockers in the early 2000s because no one could trust they were the 999,999 visitor to the website.

It sounded (and stills sounds) scammy.

There’s a joke in science circles that goes something like this:

“Do you know how they call alternative medicine that works? Just regular medicine.”

Good code made by LLM should be indistinguishable from code made by an human… It would simply be “just code”.

It’s hard to create a project the size of Godot’s and not have a human in the loop somewhere filtering the slop and trying to create a cohesive code base. At that poin they either would be overwhelmed again or the code would be unmaintainable.

And then we would go full circle and get to the same point described by the article.

Can you eli5?

Huh ninite for Linux. That’s neat