kewho
It’s representation of how the parents behave around, and communicate with, their kids, and the numerous examples of ideas for how to play with your children make the show invaluable to parents.
The fact that kids love it too only reinforces its clever brilliance.
I liked the snark from gizmodos report:
> > The smugness is, frankly, inexplicable. Even if they did successfully crack Sanborn’s code using AI (which, for the record, Sanborn says they haven’t even gotten close), what is it about asking a machine to do the work for you that generates such self-satisfaction?
Hear, hear.
https://gizmodo.com/chatbots-have-convinced-idiots-that-they...
> The smugness is, frankly, inexplicable. Even if they did successfully crack Sanborn’s code using AI (which, for the record, Sanborn says they haven’t even gotten close), what is it about asking a machine to do the work for you that generates such self-satisfaction?
Finally, a concrete example of how “idiot”ic ‘vibe coders’ sound when talking about their ‘accomplishments’.
> With a mighty Pearson's correlation of 0.091, the data indicates that this could be true!
This sounds like op thinks the data supports the hypothesis.
One would assume a negative result for the hypothesis would occur when there is a bias in the upper left quadrant, where shortest distance and highest score intersect, and looking at the graphs in figures 8 and 9, to me, there appears a bias there.