RugnirViking

Very busy ui. Mmo levels of stuff vying for the players attention

it seems to me that would only be true if the amount of knowledge needed to complete a task far exceeds the context limit. Why would that be the case? I find most people are using horribly inefficient contexts, and a naive approach to dark factories/software eng swarms seems to only compound this

> It's not very good, it's not optimized for maintenance or extension

Well yeah. Prototypes are not products, the last 10% takes 90% of the time, and so on.

Practically half the wisdom written about software in the last 20 years has been about the fact that just because you can make something that kinda looks like the thing at a glance very much does not mean you can make the thing. All those "small tweaks" you think you need to be finished usually turn out to require large redesigns, else you'll tank performance, stability, security, usability, or all four at once.

Meditate on the fact that people used to (and still do!) go to game jams and code games with freshly made assets in a day. I just did one myself without llms at the weekend. Whats the difference between that and making a game that people buy? Why does it take so much longer?

I really enjoy lemmy with summit client on my phone. Never been on it from my desktop though. Probably a good thing all things considered.

It's got pretty good coverage of most things related to my country and interests, but if you go too far afield/niche theres not many users on many topics

Ive been looking at educating myself on some version of the trivium recently. Never had any worthwhile humanities education on philosophy, rhetoric, history of ideas, or logic from my high school education in the UK. My degrees have been all STEM. It's hard to push through alone though, id love some kinda evening course I could do.

All this to say, I get it. Its in the air at the moment, I think.

the best part is how they don't help at all for the hard part (collecting and curating high quality data) and instead help with the part any intern with python and a stem undergraduate could have done already (make a pretty graph)

armed with the free version of chatgpt, pretty much anyone capable of understanding or composing the question can summon such a graph nowadays, given the data.

I want to offer a counterpoint to the above. I think that for some people in some circumstance it is true, but you can absolutely have fulfilling relationships with people you spend a lot of time and attention on, both friends and romantic partners. I think a lot of people get stuck in the classic avoidant + anxious attachment styles, where people chase what they can't have, but thats not everyone.

I'm not sure how much I actually agree with attachment style theory, but I do observe the pattern parent points out in some people, that they chase people who are distant or unavailable. But its often unhealthy for both people

gibberish no, made up facts probably in about half of all responses it gives me dozens of times a day, things that dont make sense (internal contradictions in a single response) multiple times a day.

I find there is quite a difference between something like "what do I do next" for a specific problem, and actually trying to learn something hard from an AI. The first it is quite good at, the second it is not. Surface level is easy, going into the weeds is difficult

I understand its hyperbole but are there people seriously trying to benchmark how good ai is at seducing people? lol

no. That's not a given at all? I think most reasonably people now agree that AI intelligence is spiky, that is to say, there are some areas it is amazingly good, and some areas where it spectacularly fails.

One of these areas it's not good at is sadly it's social ability. It's terrible at explaining things - just try asking ask it to explain code !

the author, I imagine, would object that the bridge should have specified that it is not supposed to collapse.

And if it did, that the specific load that made it collapse should have been specifically mentioned in the spec.

And if it was, well just wait until agents become the magical machine gods he assumes they are, then bridge collapses will be a thing of the past.

but let's be real, he and everyone else are machine generating their specs anyway, and the relevant spec didnt mention anything about bridges collapsing but instead 250 pages of llm waffling about the tensile strength of different structural materials, load patterns from different tyre treads, the effect of climate change on el nino and weather patterns for wind, and the bridge still fell down, because nobody had any idea what they were doing

you can't write emotions on paper either. You can write things that evoke emotion in the reader, but code can do that too. It happens quite often to me, at work. Often negative but occasionally positive

is that true? from looking at the map it seems there are workers and customers in europe, but usually these are separate? most europe workers working for US based entities, and most customers buying from different US entities