Comment by AceJohnny2
1 day ago
Even if the chatbot served only as a Rubber Ducky [1], that's already valuable.
I've used Claude for debugging system behavior, and I kind of agree with the author. While Claude isn't always directly helpful (hallucinations remain, or at least outdated information), it helps me 1) spell out my understanding of the system (see [1]) and 2) help me keep momentum by supplying tasks.
A rubber ducky demands that you think about your own questions, rather than taking a mental back seat as you get pummeled with information that may or may not be relevant.
I assure you that if you rubber duck at another engineer that doesn't understand what you're doing, you will also be pummeled with information that may or may not be relevant. ;)
That isn't rubber duck debugging. It's just talking to someone about the problem.
The entire point of rubber duck debugging is that the other side literally cannot respond - it's an inanimate object, or even a literal duck/animal.
7 replies →
I'm not saying you should do this, but you can do this:
https://gist.github.com/shmup/100a7529724cedfcda1276a65664dc...
Amusingly that looks less like "rubber duck debugging" and more like "socratic questions". Which certainly isn't a bad thing.
1 reply →
Lol not bad
They also don’t waste electricity, water, drive up the prices of critical computer components, or DDOS websites to steal their content.
Not to defend the extravagant power use of the AI datacenters, but I invite you to look up the ecological footprint of a human being.
1 reply →
> Even if the chatbot served only as a Rubber Ducky [1], that's already valuable.
I use the Other Voices for that. I can't entirely turn them off, I might as well make use of them!
Rubber Ducky is a terrific name for a GPT.
Also, always reminds me of Kermit singing "...you make bath time so much fun!..."