Maybe fast image editing, since it supports that.

Nice article, reminds me of boss fights in difficult games. You incrementally improve until almost suddenly, you're able to overwhelm the boss.

It's a reasonable CTA for simple cases, but definitely makes assumptions and presupposes a bit.

If you're interested, look up @JasonGoodison on YouTube. He has some great side project ideas that will open you to a lot of different concepts. Particularly in his two "build these projects and I will hire you" videos.

Even if you don't participate in his contest of sorts and just some of them for yourself, it could be worthwhile for learning.

This would be pretty cool for Flight Simulator fans too!

Not a big fan of deferring morality to ChatGPT or any AI.

> deferring

Great choice of words. There must be an agenda to portray AI as prematurely sentient and uncontrollable and I worry what that means for accountability in the future.

It's being used in a way where biases matter. Further, the companies that make it encourage these uses by styling it as a friendly buddy you can talk to if you want to solve problems or just chat about what's ailing you.

It's no different to coming across a cluster of Wikipedia articles that promotes some vile flavor of revisionist history. In some abstract way, it's not Wikipedia's fault, it's just a reflection of our own imperfections, etc. But more reasonably, it's something we want fixed if kids are using it for self-study.

> It's no different

There are similarities, I agree, but there are huge differences too. Both should be analyzed. For ex, Wikipedia requires humans in the loop, has accountability processes, has been rigorously tested and used for many years by a vast audience, and has a public, vetted agenda. I think it's much harder for Wikipedia to present bias than pre-digital encyclopedias or a non-deterministic LLM especially because Wikipedia has culture and tooling.

I wonder if this will see a renaissance of socratic methods..

ie, how did you come to this decision? Please explain your reasoning...

The process they described is not much different from gluing together ideas from studies in university (when I was studying for an arts degree).

I think its on the person to realize whether A.I. is becoming a crutch.

It can be, but on the other hand its made me think in a radically different way about concepts in humanity.

I could see this being useful as a matchmaker on a dating app, specifically for introductions.

This is a major concern of mine, I try to reframe most things as "hello world" getting the beginnings running on my own and using AI to fill in the blanks.

Otherwise the ability to reason about code gets dulled.