wccrawford

I went through a lot of medical stuff a few months ago, and every single doctor asked me if they could use the device for that instead of typing it into the computer themselves. One of them explained that it allowed them to focus their whole attention on me, instead of partially on the computer for the inputting of the data while we talked.

I'm surprised that your doctors weren't asking, and instead were just assuming.

I'm writing a unique MUD, and It was surprising to me when I posted some bug reports I'd made and it identified things I didn't complain about. "User had trouble with X" and then suggested mitigations for those problems. I ended up rejecting a lot of them because I knew I had different mitigations coming eventually, or it was working that way for a reason...

But it was pretty eye-opening to see how good it was at watching a user struggle and identifying possible fixes.

So 'ruining' here means "it's used, and the author has a bias against AI".

For the vast, vast majority of people, this will make either little difference, or improve the experience.

Modern image generation has fixed most of the obvious tell-tales like mangled hands, square pupils, etc. And the few that remain end up looking like spooky things, which are pretty good for scary art anyhow.

I think we should focus on writing the existing software better before being more ambitious. The absolute wave of "ai slop" is from people who are "more ambitious" now. Why do we want more of that?

I'm being more ambitious in that I'm working on projects that I had sidelined for literal decades because I didn't have time for them. But I'm writing the same things, just faster. And probably better, rather than just what I'd have done before.

And I'm being slightly more ambitious in that I'm using languages I haven't used before, like Rust.

But when I hear that a non-programmer wrote a new ai-assisted (vibe or not) thing, I walk away and wait for the it to mature, be surpassed, or find out it's an absolute shitshow. An unsurprising number of them were shitshows and it came out fairly quickly after I decided to wait and see.

Wouldn't it also screw over poor people in gentrified neighborhoods who had no control over the situation? People would be forced to sell early or risk all their savings drying up and then being forced to sell anyhow.

It's a generic insult that a lot of people throw out, but when they're using the term seriously, they mean that the code doesn't get properly reviewed by a human. It probably still gets QA'd by a human, but in the final form, not reading the code.

AI-assisted generally means that a human is reviewing the code, though there's a lot of doubt about how well that can really be done with the amount of code an AI can output. It's generally capable of being as fast or faster than a human can review it.

I agree with the thought, but sometimes things are so bad that it's worth an exception.

This looks like one of those things.

Stargate Atlantis and Stargate Universe aren't "occasionally on space ships". That's fundamental to their entire plot.

From Wikipedia, though: "Space opera is a subgenre of science fiction[1] and science fantasy[2] that emphasizes epic outer space adventures set in a universe in which faster-than-light travel has become common."

Stargate, even without the 2 series above, absolutely fits that definition. Very little of SG1 takes place on Earth. It's absolutely about aliens and crossing distances faster than light, and the epic adventures and social interactions that result.

Edit: Also, there's pretty heavy discussion that Dr Who is space opera.

The "Stargate" franchise absolutely had both space and space ships.

The parent dropped the "sg1" and is talk about the entire franchise, not just 1 show or movie in it.

Rarest is terrible. I absolutely know that baked ube is a street food, and way less likely to be guessed than Udon, and yet I'm penalized for nobody else guessing it yet?

I didn't even play latest and oldest, because that's just a guessing game.

Are there no accounts? Can I not continue playing on a different PC?

No, it has stars. /s

sigh Yeah, that's really a bad look for them to claim no likes and then have something that is functionally identical.

I've been eyeing this since you posted it yesterday, and I hadn't seen the Pro UI stuff until someone here pointed it out.

I have to say that $2000 UI components is enough for me to look for something else instead, even with the free tier being so generous today. I understand the desire the earn money from hard work, but that's exactly why I would be wary of the free tier getting smaller and smaller over time, or essentially being abandoned.

I'm not saying I'd never adopt it. But that Pro UI situation would make me wait years before even considering it. And with AI the way it is, I expect to see a lot of alternatives that are similar soon, and perhaps they meet my needs better, too.

I was going to wait a while anyhow, but now that wait time will be a lot longer.

TP Link's support is the worst, too.

I bought an Omada, thinking I was getting a quality product. It died in the first 2 weeks.

Support accused me of not using a surge protector (it was plugged into a UPS) and grudgingly sent me a replacement.

Even at home, I can't risk having to replace my router every 2 weeks, so I just stuffed it in a box. I did use it again later, but wasn't happy with it, and ended up with a Ubiquiti Unifi UCG-Ultra. It's better than the TP-Link Deco and Omada, Eero Pro, Google Wifi, and Asus routers I've had, though I'll admit some of the Asus were pretty decent.

Well it had to copy someone's style. I guess it was you! :D

Seriously, though, there's nothing Claude does that isn't fairly common in some circle. It's just that so much of it is uncommon in daily speech patterns. We asked it to be an expert at things, and so it acts like experts do. It doesn't surprise me that it doesn't talk in the way people do for every day speech.