Legitimately, no. I tried to use it to write code and the code it wrote was dog shit. I tried to use it to write an article and the article it wrote was dog shit. I tried to use it to generate a logo and the logo it generated was both dog shit and raster graphic, so I wouldn’t even have been able to use it.
It’s good at answering some simple things, but sometimes even gets that wrong. It’s like an extremely confident but undeniably stupid friend.
Oh, actually it did do something right. I asked it to help flesh out an idea and turn it into an outline, and it was pretty good at that. So I guess for going from idea to outline and maybe outline to first draft, it’s ok.
The output is only as good as the model being used. If you want to write code then use a model designed for code. Over the weekend I wrote an Android app to be able to connect my phone to my Ollama instance from off my network. I’ve never done any coding beyond scripts, and the AI walked me through setting up the IDE and a git repository before we even got started on the code. 3 hours after I had the idea I had the app installed and working on my phone.
I didn’t say the code didn’t work. I said it was dog shit. Dog shit code can still work, but it will have problems. What it produced looks like an intern wrote it. Nothing against interns, they’re just not gonna be able to write production quality code.
It’s also really unsettling to ask it about my own libraries and have it answer questions about them. It was trained on my code, and I just feel disgusted about that. Like, whatever, they’re not breaking the rules of the license, but it’s still disconcerting to know that they could plagiarize a bunch of my code if someone asked the right prompt.
(And for anyone thinking it, yes, I see the joke about how it was my bad code that it trained on. Funny enough, some of the code I know was in its training data is code I wrote when I was 19, and yeah, it is bad code.)
Legitimately, no. I tried to use it to write code and the code it wrote was dog shit. I tried to use it to write an article and the article it wrote was dog shit. I tried to use it to generate a logo and the logo it generated was both dog shit and raster graphic, so I wouldn’t even have been able to use it.
It’s good at answering some simple things, but sometimes even gets that wrong. It’s like an extremely confident but undeniably stupid friend.
Oh, actually it did do something right. I asked it to help flesh out an idea and turn it into an outline, and it was pretty good at that. So I guess for going from idea to outline and maybe outline to first draft, it’s ok.
The output is only as good as the model being used. If you want to write code then use a model designed for code. Over the weekend I wrote an Android app to be able to connect my phone to my Ollama instance from off my network. I’ve never done any coding beyond scripts, and the AI walked me through setting up the IDE and a git repository before we even got started on the code. 3 hours after I had the idea I had the app installed and working on my phone.
I didn’t say the code didn’t work. I said it was dog shit. Dog shit code can still work, but it will have problems. What it produced looks like an intern wrote it. Nothing against interns, they’re just not gonna be able to write production quality code.
It’s also really unsettling to ask it about my own libraries and have it answer questions about them. It was trained on my code, and I just feel disgusted about that. Like, whatever, they’re not breaking the rules of the license, but it’s still disconcerting to know that they could plagiarize a bunch of my code if someone asked the right prompt.
(And for anyone thinking it, yes, I see the joke about how it was my bad code that it trained on. Funny enough, some of the code I know was in its training data is code I wrote when I was 19, and yeah, it is bad code.)