xboxnolifes

Yes. The canned responses, for the most part, were not pretending to be human. They were obviously templates.

I am far less annoyed by AI responses where I am told up front they are AI.

I modify my biological drive chemically every time I wake up and drink my daily coffee. Seems fine and we've been doing that for a long time now.

People also do it with smoking, and the only reason that is bad is because of the cancer, not the drive changes.

Well, all of the big jumps of technology that revolve around communication at least. While im sure some pedant could find an nth degree link, I dont think the cotton gin or steam engine led to increased spam in any direct way.

I find it very easy to find people who support systems marketed as empowering police to better catch criminals.

> The way I look at it, let's say 20% of users are addicts and who will jump through any hoop they need to in order to gamble. Very difficult to help this group. Banning won't stop them from betting.

I think this position is fundamentally incorrect. Banning gambling reduces the volume of money in gambling, making it hard to make big bets. You will never stop all gambling, but you can reduce how many people ruin their life with it.

The first amendment protects you from (mostly only direct) government retaliation on your speech. It does not define what is and isn't censorship. It doesn't even protect you from the government circumventing it by having most communications go through private avenues and then strong-arming those private entities to regulate speech. And it certainly doesn't protect you from private censorship from massive corporate entities that seemingly want to have a corporate autocracy.

It says they didn't save time, not that they didn't save effort.

The difference between censorship and moderation is the ability to realistically opt-out. Your friends might get mad at your for saying something, but you can choose your friends. Your community might not allow certain speech, but you generally get to choose the communities you are a part of. When the avenues where 99% of all communication go through "moderate" speech a certain way, that starts being censorship.

The difference is somewhat part who is doing the moderating, but it is far more important the ability to opt-out without significant negative impact.

At an individual level, the forward process is only done 3 times and you can reverse it in batches as slow as you wish. And after the first time you have to do it, all of the friction is gone, since you've already setup your exchange method.

No law is going to prevent billionaires overnight. At the stage we're in, any political change needs to aim for decades in the future.

I'm not sure how one can be cognizant of world events and think we've put religion behind us.

I've never heard anyone ever pronounce it that way.

If you've never touched a SaaS/IaaS cli tool, yes, thats what they are.

Apple isn't a person. It doesn't need to memorize. Its a Apple failing because no process caught it, and because anything coming out of Apple that is bad is a failing by Apple.

What objective things can you mention about the WASM sandbox besides saying "it works"? People prefer seeing good benchmarks.

Faster than ever is likely part of the problem. When everyone can go faster and faster, competition becomes fierce and what was once a thought provoking puzzle to solve becomes an exhausting, never ending LLM gogogo. Down time? Spin up 5 more LLMs and write some more prompts to prototype a new UI or something.

flexible divs side by side is trivial with both flexbox and grids. Far, far, far easier than prior to flexbox.

I didn't only read half of your comment. I just think it is silly to vent about US politics in a conversation about Germany politics.

For static content, the best option is probably to download the webpage as a PDF and add it to the appendix of your report.

I think humans just prefer halves and quarters over thirds. So, you either get a full hour, a half hour, or a 15 minute meeting.

Yes, abuse of a system with some reliance on trust does expose the reliance on trust.

Why does my finger pointing not help, but yours does? That is my point.

When I'm asking a company chatbot questions about the company... I would expect it to give answers in a qay the company wanted it to. Thats what's happening here.

And in the opposite media anything not right is "far left socialist extremists".

Ironically, so many modern tech companies are arguably less incentivized to provide a good technology experience than non-tech companies, since the tech company's value/revenue primarily comes from directly exploiting their users for their data and/or attention. Improving the user experience frequently directly reduces their revenue. No amount of free LLM usage can allow a video serving company to both serve ad-free videos and make money from ads in their videos.

Though, maybe the irony only exists because we use the broad term tech company instead of the more generally accurate terms data harvesting company and attention consuming company.

Its a pointless tag. You can say a tag is required if you use AI, but the linux maintainers know some people are still just going to lie. And they know having this rule will lead to the occasional witch huntwhen someone tries to sus out code that seems AI written but does not have the tag.

They dont think the juice is worth the squeeze. LLMs are just another tool.

Your math explanation starts with a math concept that the vast, vast, vast majority of people will have never even heard of, even in math-adjacent fields. It's not anti-math reasoning. It's a lack of self-awareness that your background is very math heavy, which makes that particular explanation make sense to you. I've gone my entire schooling, as a student who was always one of the few who were "good at math", all the the way through my CS education, without ever having heard of a functor until I came across the Haskell monad explanation meme.

Your next step could be to blame the school systems if you want, but that doesn't help the situation at hand.

I've done this, and always get subpar results. I cant get the LLM to make the minor tweaks I want to see, and now I have no mental model of the code to make the fix myself. Sometimes they arent minor things.

Careful, you might accidentally improve the user experience of SaaS products.

Each existing software solution having 10,000 clones is not the same as software being saturated. There are still unsolved problems.