I think the issue is people AI assisted code, test then commit.

Traditional software dev would be build, test, refactor, commit.

Even the Clean Coder recommends starting with messy code then tidying it up.

We just need to apply traditional methods to AI assisted coding.

At that point you lose all potential gains from just using AI - it's harder and slower to read and understand a bunch of verbose slop and then clean it up

Laravel is extremely stable and consistent.

The difference between JS frameworks and RoR/Laravel is the ecosystem cohesion. RoR and Laravel ecosystems employ the RoR or Laravel way of doing things and everything works together very smoothly.

JS solutions are loosely coupled, lots of good reasons to do so, but comes at a major complexity cost.

I agree. Opinionated frameworks are better in this regard.

Ruby on Rails and Laravel all the way. Solid, proven, stable and scalable.

While I understand the sentiment, it ignores many people have English as a second language, many people are dyslexic and have dysgraphia. AI is a great assistant. A good approach will be to encourage people to develop their thinking than use the AI tools.

Using AI to craft a thoughtful, concise comment is different than synco-slop.

That analogy does not make sense. You are assuming political spectrum is a left to right gradient which you just move along, when in reality it is a constantly shifting multi dimensional spectrum that shifts on different issues. However if we apply today’s centerist to the end of the 1990’s they would be more a Bush conservative.

They are after the models without post training guardrails.

My guess is their HR is already monitoring it with instant termination processes in place.

You're assuming a lot about Elon's ability to assemble and execute a process competently. They will probably end up hiring people off this list and firing them later.

I think what is much more interesting is what OpenAI and Google will do. There's probably some threshold of signatories where the companies in question do not fire everyone when they decide they want the DoD's business, the question will be how many people have to sign to cross it... and will enough people sign.

I don't think Google would bat an eye at firing 500 people to secure a DoD contract, but would they fire 5,000?

You can sign the form anonymously.

Both the automated verification methods depend on Google servers and Google can almost certainly retrieve that data if they want to regardless of if the signers or verifiers delete it.

XAI has already announced they are 100% in

https://x.ai/news/us-gov-dept-of-war

All the more reason to collect their employees' signatures.

This kind of screams desperation, but I guess that's what happens when you're niche AI.

niche is a polite way to put it

No. The US needs automated weapons China will attack Taiwan, Hamas will go on another murder rampage.

Several factors: 1. Em dashes are common use in the Queens English

2. People with dyslexia and dysgraphia can more easily interact online

3. People who speak a primary language other than English can more easily interact online

The last 2 options mean people who previously would have been more reluctant to participate now have less of a barrier.

So while there may be AI generated content, we should just assume it is all negative.

I don't think this explains why new accounts use EM-dashes with a 10x higher prevalence than the baseline established by baseline.

I also don't think the first point is correct at all.