mpalczewski

yeah. that's exactly what I thought it was.

satire has become indistinguishable from real life

[flagged]

oh. so basically, no low effort patches.

Sounds like llm's have made is so easy for anyone without a shred of know how to submit anything that people prompt one or two times and consider the job done, not knowing any better becausue they don't have to.

ok it needs to be reliable. do we believe people are more reliable than ai?

they own the project of course it is their right.

if someone disagrees they can fork.

I don't understand why it would be the right call. not my field.

haven't seen a good explanation in the comments. (yet?)

I’ve been able to contribute to projects recently using ai. And another project banned this so I didn’t bother. The second was a bug fix for an issue I was having. The first was a new feature.

Either way my bug got fixed but if a project maintainer doesn’t want it who am I to fight it.

You can always fork it. I suspect my contributions are higher quality because I use different model providers to review each other but whatever.

there's a big difference between now and then. we built up capacity. dark fiber. and couldn't use until we got broadband. In general. ai capacity is being used right now today.

And chewing. How fast it is eaten is likely affected.

Much of make it by human talk is giant cope.

we insist that humans can do things better in some way or do things that ai can't do. some of that is true right now, but can't assume that will hold.

and yes it requires iterations and taste right now.

the idea that it can't happen in the future. or that humans are special in some way (which you are not claiming, but is a common claim) is the cope.

instead, human slop with that ted talk format.

all for the following. 1. give a shit. 2. build a system and codify it 3. review iterate and recreate 4. be creative

so you thought I had a handy citation showing 0.5g is meaningful.

or were you just trying to make a point that you didn't think 0.5g is meaningful.

i don't fucking know. vegetarians seem to gain more than non vegetarians from creatine supplementation. implying that eating meat is meaningful. then you fixated on 0.5g as if 4oz of red meat per day was allot or not, I don't even know.

but I see it now. the accusation of goal post shifting, you are arguing about what idk. find your damn citation.

you are either doing it for moral reasons. in that case all these facts are irrelevant. or you can eat red meat for a month and see if you can tell the difference. if you can't there's your answer.

citations are bullshit for this context. Unless you are doing research.

A vegetarian diet is not a null hypothesis. Other way around

I doubt any company shares your moral values. Though a few of them might pay some lip service do some of your moral values. You tell me, have you audit all the companies you do business with to see if they share your moral values.