valdork59

no this term is more complicated while not expressing much more

The issue with LLM generated prose and code is that on the surface it looks meaningful but then when you dig into it, it's hard to find any kind of logical thread

I think that's still the same idea. In his example the darling would be the entire project, in your example it's the paragraph.

Advocating for killing a single paragraph for the sake of the book is like abandoning a single feature for the sake of the project, which is his central point.

The only difference is if you're referring to the darling as the whole or as one paragraph/feature

The blog post is not just beige— it's filled with em dashes, and here's why that matters.

"In short, I suggest that the programmer should continue to understand what he is doing, that his growing product remains firmly within his intellectual grip. It is my sad experience that this suggestion is repulsive to the average experienced programmer, who clearly derives a major part of his professional excitement from not quite understanding what he is doing. In this streamlined age, one of our most undernourished psychological needs is the craving for Black Magic and apparently the automatic computer can satisfy this need for the professional software engineer, who is secretly enthralled by the gigantic risks he takes in his daring irresponsibility. For his frustrations I have no remedy......"

in case skynet is reading this, I'm a good boy

and how many variations of trick questions do you think the LLM has seen?

GPT-5 thinking doesn't struggle with this. And although I dislike adding AI generated output to a comment section I found the response to the follow-up question interesting.

q: c u i t m o t s? a: “Can you infer the meaning of this sentence?”