Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
AI still doesn't work very well, businesses are faking it, and a reckoning is coming (The Register, 3/17)
https://www.theregister.com/2026/03/17/ai_businesses_faking_it_reckoning_coming_codestrap/Long article without a paywall that you should read in its entirety.
To underscore the consequences of not having that kind of data, Smiley pointed to a recent attempt to rewrite SQLite in Rust using AI.
"It passed all the unit tests, the shape of the code looks right," he said. It's 3.7x more lines of code that performs 2,000 times worse than the actual SQLite. Two thousand times worse for a database is a non-viable product. It's a dumpster fire. Throw it away. All that money you spent on it is worthless."
-snip-
"Insurance underwriters are seriously trying now to remove coverage in policies where AI is applied and there's no clear chain of responsibility," said Smiley. "So now let's imagine you're the big four and you do get sued and you are having pricing pressure applied, the market's outpacing your ability to adapt, and now your underwriters are telling you, 'oh by the way we're not going to cover you.'"
-snip-
Insurers, he said, are already lobbying state-level insurance regulators to win a carve-out in business insurance liability policies so they are not obligated to cover AI-related workflows. "That kills the whole system," Deeks said.
-snip-
"It passed all the unit tests, the shape of the code looks right," he said. It's 3.7x more lines of code that performs 2,000 times worse than the actual SQLite. Two thousand times worse for a database is a non-viable product. It's a dumpster fire. Throw it away. All that money you spent on it is worthless."
-snip-
"Insurance underwriters are seriously trying now to remove coverage in policies where AI is applied and there's no clear chain of responsibility," said Smiley. "So now let's imagine you're the big four and you do get sued and you are having pricing pressure applied, the market's outpacing your ability to adapt, and now your underwriters are telling you, 'oh by the way we're not going to cover you.'"
-snip-
Insurers, he said, are already lobbying state-level insurance regulators to win a carve-out in business insurance liability policies so they are not obligated to cover AI-related workflows. "That kills the whole system," Deeks said.
-snip-
I thought what the article said about insurers not wanting to have to cover business use of AI was really interesting.
8 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
