Not a big fan of the format of the talk. The guy is a good orator, but it takes ages to go to the point. A bit annoying if you're actually interested in the technical part rather than the jokes.
Your comment misses the point of the talk. It isn't to explain to the viewer what that line of code does, it's to talk about talking about what that line of code does.
The point is the journey and the discussion around what the line of code does, and how that discussion is valuable. The point isn't to tell us what the code itself does.
If you use GPT-4 with Browsing turned on and supply it with the title, it will find the page and use the transcript and you can ask it questions. Then you can look at the transcripts to find the spots and verify. Alternatively, if you have an AI-enabled browser you can ask it about the transcript once you open it.
I ask it to quote the section and it helps to find. But if you prefer reading the transcript that’s fine too. It’s not a commandment. It’s my sharing what works for me.
Fair enough. I was not criticising you, sorry if it sounded that way. I am just puzzled by instances where it seems an old fashioned approach (such as control-F in this case) would perform at least as well as fancy (and not always reliable) AI techniques.
The transcript is AI-generated sadly, so it isn't typo-free enough for Cmd-F always. Especially programming content gets messed up. "char" -> "car" and so on and so forth, but GPT-4 will correctly fix all that up.
