Pocster

For isolated things this is a super fast way. Tweaking the graphics for example or an effect . I can literally “ let’s try this “ ; 5 seconds later viewing it . I love this part .

Frequently its "given up" today. Seems to go through hourly phases even with the same code of amazing and shite. Chat's bodging again now. Gave it a specific render description and it did a cheap BBC B demo for me. It's like it's programmed to sometimes offer cheap solutions i.e less compute. I reckon at the end of the day when it goes home to Mrs Chat it bitches about this guy who's only on the 20 quid plan and wants the (expletive deleted)ing world! Now its basically forcing me to use codex cloud ... "I cant do it but codex cloud can patch this" . I'm going to conclude this is deliberate as now each scout/patch uses around 5% of my 5 hr quota. These companies are shit. Need to use codex cloud for major revision or feature add then tell chat to do one and use local llm for scout.

The thing chat and I suspect all coding AI's are crap at is not 'thinking' about the problem outside the box. For example ask it for code to draw a circle (ignoring a circle primitive) it would use sin/cos/pi because that's standard maths. But! thats really shit. Will work but slow. I can think of 20 ways that would be 1000% faster. Equally a Astar algorithm i.e. path finding from baddy to player around scenery. Standard methods will be used. Shite slow, not practical in a real game. So "understanding" the problem for efficient code is the method not the code. That requires a human. I was at 86% gpu usage because its code uses 'standard' methods. Guide it on different techniques and it visually looks the same but halved gpu usage.

I can’t draw for toffee so chat does code so everything is procedurally generated . Reflections , fresnel , blooming all the ps5 effects I love . Lipsync on the bots mouth . Fuzzy logic because when you say “ Birdy “ it could be translated as “ birdie “ . Also phonetic matching e.g “mould play “ = “ Coldplay “ . No hard coding of phrases everything just open source . Love it .

OH! My rendering with reflection/bloom (expletive deleted)s m3 gpu even before local LLM does work. Oh!. looks like I need a 2nd pc just for dashboard!

Kid in a sweetshop!.

tell you something I love with chat. I upload screenshots when we have issues. For a whiel we had some old text/icons - no issue just left there while I fix other things. It would seem from repeated screen shots it decided to remove them. No "I'm getting rid of this" just gone. (expletive deleted)ING MAGIC I TELL YOU!

Hmmmm, your project you're working on must have REALLY upset someone!

Erm, watching your ££££ go. This is what I hate with cloud models. Not just the cost. But that they can change costs at any time, it's clear that what cloud model you run now may not be the cloud model you run in 1 mnute i.e. backend changes. I hate it. You become dependent on it like a drug dealer and then they move the goal posts. This is my main reason for enjoying the 20 quid 'near' claude experience with chat. It requires more work to setup, but i cant bitch (though I do!) for £20. But of ourse a local llm will be consistent .... models just aint quite there yet. But you know even though not out an M5 with 512gb still tempting. Really need models to catch up rather than hardware.

I often say to chat "Are you a BBC Model B?, you are supposedly frontier cutting edge AI. So stop being a prick". Surprisingly it does frquently man up and produce something nearer what I requested. SO the answer is insult it for better results. Like humans I guess!

or (expletive deleted)ing token speed "test". mac Mx vs rtxY . Mac loses of course. Thats what stopped me getting the m3 at first always slower than rtx BUT when you need a larger model or multiple models Mac wins. For me flexibility over speed is the winner easily. (expletive deleted)ing 10k for an rtx6000 with 96Gb.... Nvidia make macs look cheap!

(expletive deleted)s me off when I see youtube chatgpv vs opus vs fable all given the same prompot to "write a flappy birds 3d game" and thats a test!. Amazing any of them produce anything at all but (expletive deleted) me - it's not a TOY!. It's super powerful.

I also notice chat seems to offer default simple solutions. So if I ask for a 'face' as I've done. I did give some detail but I end up with a crude basic version. Even if I ask for an authentic water effect and specify it I still get a very basic version. I queried why after I had spec'd it and it said because most people don't want the full thing. I asked for examples. People asking for "a minecraft game" - is obviously a massive project so it gives a very crude simplistic response - because apparently people wont specify exact detail for more advancement. I assume this is where the "toy" reference comes from. Chat seems to believe 99% of coding tasks are simplistic and non challenging "fix this bug" , "refactor this" . Of course you could argue that is not a chatbot's job to be a claude complete "coding solution" - but as I said for 20 quid a month effectively unlimited its the best value for money ever.

Exactly how I use chat gpt. These llm's are programmed to be passively nice to us dumb humans so equally I get completements on how I treat it like a softeare engineeer and not a toy. I upload code to it (that it wrote) it then blames me as though I wrote it and then it improves or suggests alterations to my (its) code. It admit it doesnt follow hard grounded rules even when commited to memory hence the ridged menu/harness

This is what llm allows in coding . Limitation isn’t your coding or skills anymore . Knowledge of what you want and how it can be achieved is sufficient. Amazing time to be alive .