moron4hire

I think the key tell is that the writing doesn't actually illuminate anything worth learning. The more I see of AI produced output, the more I believe that there is nothing there that wasn't already in the prompt. It's an inflation of a single idea to pages of text. It meandors about and never actually gets into detail.

It's a lot like talking to someone who doesn't know what they are talking about but are good at faking it for a while. The game works by leaning on pat phrases, circular reasoning, and hoping nobody is paying too close of attention. I think this is why it's so popular with the corporate executive class, as that has been their mode of communicating their entire careers. To them, they don't see anything wrong.

"Shitty writing existed before AI" is unfortunately an all too common rejoinder to this issue. That's not an excuse. That doesn't make it better. Just because the pointy haired boss talks that way doesn't mean we should be gleefully pouring gasoline on the fire.

Even longer than that. I had been doing work with touchscreen oriented interfaces on Windows XP. But officially with Windows 8's Metro UI, touch was the whole point.

No, there really aren't.

That's functionally why it's bullshit, which makes it political bullshit that anyone argues that it's important.

There is no meaningful way in which you can exercise your "2nd Amendment rights." With the 1st Amendment, we say that it's specifically a protection for speech that people don't like, because otherwise what's the point? And people do successfully defend that right in court, on occasion.

But with the 2nd Amendment, you can't expect the State to uphold a right to attack itself. It hasn't ever happened at it never will. Which, in turn, proves the bullshit-ness of the 1st Amendment. If the 1st Amendment described a meaningful right that could challenge the State, then you wouldn't be allowed to have it.

So that's the ground truth. The point I was making was that people who espouse the importance of the 2nd Amendment are bullshit themselves. Because it is trivial to see that the 2nd Amendment is toothless, making it a single-issue voting policy as most of those people do indicates either they are delusional or they seek some other end and the guns are just a cover. The fact they keep voting for a party that keeps damaging the economy in the name of Sticking It To Brown People seems like a pretty good candidate for why.

This is how we know "The 2nd Amendment is to protect against government tyranny" is complete, absolute bullshit.

> if there's a government agency whose job it is to deport people in a country illegally,

Following you so far

> and they do that,

Yeah, that's where you fucked up. That's not what ICE is doing that everyone is upset about. It's the locking up, deporting, and killing of people who are here legally, they just happen to be brown.

This is a problem of requiring PRs for everything, not of putting tasks in the repo.

They did do that.

This is a typical example of what one would call a "gamer".

It pays better than working for the government directly. It does not pay well overall.

Texas would finally pass it's yearly vote to secesed.

While I agree with you, it's so far and away from anything that could actually happen that I despair over what could be done. It seems like my children's schools change their evaluation criteria every other year to some "new" and "evidence-based" criteria. Do the kids do any different work? No. Do that get evaluated by different standards? Not really. I wouldn't call changing "pass" to "meets expectations" and fail to "not on track for success" to be a substantive change. Forcing equilateral, rectilinear wooden dowels into orifices of constant radius doesn't change the fact that we're playing a stupid game.

No, I definitely mean the entity in charge of maintaining the register, not the location in which the register is kept.

This is it. There's a blurry line wherever something should be the registrar's prerogative. The more on the "personal" or "local" scale, the less it should be in control of the registrar.

Though, from a certain academic perspective, I can maybe see some idiot making an ignorantly in-good-faith argument for something like personal names needing to be controlled at the registrar level. Never mind that all of the registrars are evil or that most people share a name with someone else in the world. It ironically goes hand-in-hand with their evilness that they should have the power to deny one party the use of their own name due to the incidental, unrelated, but preemptive use of that name by another party.

Said as the top search result for my firstname-lastname amongst at least 7 such people that I'm aware of, one of which I know is also a software developer. I only continue to preemptively register accounts under my one and only true name to avoid receiving their false and deceitful spam when they forget their email domain is Yahoo, not Gmail...

I know, you might be thinking he's are doing it on purpose to punish me for being more popular. I could see that if the email I was getting was porn or scams or whatever. It's not. It's mortgage paperwork. It's personalized cake decorations. It's hotel reservations. This dude is the worst at maintaining his data I've never met.

Jesus Christ. In 25 years of working on the Web, this is the first time I'm hearing of "third level domains". WTF? Where and when did this come from?

No shade to the folks being harmed by this situation. Sorry. I'm just really non-plussed at the idea that the registrar is charging for what looks like should be a DNS prefix.