No you have to run them through an elaborate model first, then it’s totally legit to use someone else’s literal words as if they were your own
No you have to run them through an elaborate model first, then it’s totally legit to use someone else’s literal words as if they were your own
Mfer are you going to try a coup or what! Crazy that this is a legitimate question
I loved this cheeky comeback.
Why not reinvent the wheel? I’ve already learned a great deal in just starting this project, and I’m excited to learn a great deal more.
Your energy is infectious! I’ll be eagerly following this project
This is it. The real product is hype, with a tiny tiny little kernel of actual utility, that is puffed up and remixed until the hype dies away, and we have to make do with whatever’s left.*
The hype machine with generative shit went into fuckin overdrive because while yes there is a grift component, natch; unlike with blockchain, nfts, web3, etc, there is an actual visible thing that the technology can do that hasn’t been done before.
People who are used to selling nothing but vapour lost their minds when they saw it, because rightfully so, they realised how much grift they were going to be able to make off of it.
* Usually this involves a bunch of platform engineers et al de-tooling codebases and infrastructure.
I think we all had that first moment where copilot generates a good snippet, and we were blown away. But having used it for a while now, I find most of what it suggests feels like jokes.
Like it does save some typing / time spent checking docs, but you have to be very careful to check its work.
I’ve definitely seen a lot more impressively voluminous, yet flawed pull requests, since my employer started pushing for everyone to use it.
I foresee a real reckoning of unmaintainable codebases in a couple years.
I agree with your parenthetical, but Wikipedia actually agrees on your main point: Wikipedia itself is not a source of truth.
Yeah a thread is more like a close conversation. If you comment in a thread you’re going to be heard front and centre. It keeps non-sequiters down and it’s good etiquette to at least acknowledge the points raised above.
Tree based is more like splintered conversations around a party, where people drift in and out of side convos. This lends itself to a more anonymous, transient communication style.
Ideal for a quick little session on your phone, really
Shootout to doomworld. I think that software is Discourse. Anyway they’ve always had a vibrant communities
Ugh too many people. My book club and local dev group are on Discord, also a few old co-workers, and then various communities like rainwave, ocremix diaspora, gamedev stuff…
I wish it was still interoperable with IRC. It’s come to really grate on me.
Darn you beat me to it haha
I know right? Also iirc there was some discord alternative, but I can’t quite remember the name… it’s just as well, the company owning it probably shut it down. It’s not like it’s some free protocol that can be used by anyone, sigh 😞
Sounds like a Bethesda game to me
When you move fast and break things, but then have to pay to fix the things you broke 🥺
I grew up in a community co-op! It was so great
Honest mistake, but you’re probably thinking of a superintendent. They are usually an employee of the landlord, and do things like collect the landlord’s rents and sometimes fix appliances, etc.
It’s true. It’s not been a totally smooth ride. It’s taken work to educate fellow fans, and making the intolerant unwelcome.
Like there was early “controversy” about Geordie getting to be on the bridge. Which seemed kind of logical, but if you scratched below the surface you’d see how selective that critique was. That it was just racism and ableism
Fuck that’s so nasty
Miss me with those RPGs where they spent too much budget on combat to make it optional
Yeah that feeling of spacial awareness as you’re kiting around groups of enemies. Helps to have simple, easily identifiable level geometry for that matter.
I was actually describing a piece of software, which is not considered a human being, and can in fact be treated differently without any legal or philosophical confusion