I just read how someone on RetroArch tries to improve documentation by using Copilot. But not in the sense as we might think. His approach is to let Copilot read the documentation and give him follow-up question a hypothetical developer might have. This also could be extended to normal code I guess, to pretend it being a student maybe and have it ask questions instead generating or making changes? I really like this approach.
For context, I myself don’t use online Ai tools, only offline “weak” Ai run on my hardware. And I mostly don’t use it to generate code, but more like asking questions in the chatbox or revising code parts and then analyze and test the “improved” version. Otherwise I do not use it much in any other form. It’s mainly to experiment.
In writing, it’s simply the most magnificent brainstorming tool ever created.
Idiots using it to substitute-for writing, & just sign-off on whatever is produced, ought never be trusted again, with writing-responsibility.
( IF you’re signing-off on something, THEN you’re responsible for its quality, is the principle )
I think you’re onto something…
using it to corner one into better-quality understanding’s a good use of it.
_ /\ _