I Do Not Have That Much RAM

Ah yes, nothing says "efficient solution" like using a machete labeled "Deep learning" to slice through a tiny piece of bread labeled "Simple problem." The classic case of computational overkill. Why use a simple if-statement when you could train a 500-layer neural network that requires a small power plant to run? Next week: using quantum computing to calculate a 15% tip.

When you ask two AI models the same basic math question and get completely opposite answers. Deepseek correctly identifies that 9.9 > 9.11 (treating them as decimals), while ChatGPT somehow thinks 9.11 > 9.9. This is why we still have jobs. For now. Nothing says "trust me with your critical systems" like failing elementary school math. Somewhere, a software engineer is using this screenshot in their slide deck titled "Why Human QA Still Matters".

While scientists fret about AI overlords, some of us have found a more practical solution to the robot uprising. Nothing says "checkmate, Skynet" like a well-aimed shower head to the motherboard. Sure, they might develop consciousness, but they haven't figured out waterproofing yet. The oldest IT solution in the book: have you tried turning it off and making it wet forever?

The irony of AI companies fighting over scraped data is peak Silicon Valley drama. OpenAI spent years vacuuming up the internet's content to train ChatGPT, and now they're clutching their pearls when DeepSeek does the same to them. It's like watching a digital version of "The Princess Bride" where the dude who stole everything is suddenly outraged when someone steals from him. Twenty years in tech has taught me one universal truth: there's nothing more sacred than the data you've already pilfered from someone else.

The classic "ChatGPT will make me rich" delusion meets reality. Someone asks their AI overlord to generate a million-dollar app with zero bugs, and you can practically see the existential crisis unfolding in real-time as they realize the output is... less than stellar. The contradiction is chef's kiss: "make me an app that makes $1M/month" + "don't make any mistakes" = asking AI to solve problems that actual billion-dollar companies with armies of engineers still can't crack. Meanwhile, ChatGPT probably just generated a todo list app with hardcoded credentials and SQL injection vulnerabilities. If getting rich was as easy as typing a prompt, we'd all be retired on a beach somewhere instead of debugging production at 3 AM. But hey, at least the AI-generated code compiles... sometimes.

Standing at the crossroads of decision, a developer faces the harsh truth about AI-generated code. GPT-5 promised the architectural equivalent of the Sistine Chapel but delivered a beautiful disaster instead. The elegantly refactored codebase looks magnificent on paper—all shiny patterns and clever abstractions—but runs with the grace of a three-legged elephant. It's the coding equivalent of building a Ferrari with cardboard parts. Stunning to look at, completely useless in practice. Yet we keep coming back for more punishment, don't we? Because deep down, we're all suckers for beautiful code, even when it spectacularly fails to compile.