Phind is better about linking sources. I’ve found that generated code sometimes points me in the right direction, but other times it leads me down a rabbit hole of obsolete syntax or other problems.
Ironically, if you already are familiar with the code then you can easily tell where the LLM went wrong and adapt their generated code.
But I don’t use it much because its almost more trouble than its worth.
They have tasers, which didn’t work. Then move to pepper spray to blind the person and batons to subdue them.
Other countries where guns are uncommon but knife attacks are more common they have long hooked poles to capture someone. That’s impractical to carry so wouldn’t have been available in this situation but it is a tool that can be used when called out to a knife threat.
The problem here is the response doesn’t match the crime (fare avoidance) and doesn’t match the threat either. If the only solution you have for littering is to blow up a city then its time to step back and rethink the problem.
Three innocent people injured, months of investigation, and millions in lawsuit settlements. This is a failure of the officers but also a failure in training them how to respond.
Just want to point out that it absolutely is possible to train an AI that will keep track of its sources for inspiration and can attribute those when it makes a response.
Meaning creators could be compensated for their parts of AI generated stuff, if anyone wanted to.
If we keep going we might accidentally reinvent Usenet news.
Not saying that like its a bad thing, just saying we might be able to take some inspiration from there.
Imagine a company with the power to break half the worlds computers with a business decision.