bogdanoff_2

I totally agree with the "attention stealing".

What you can do is create a hotkey to toggle autocomplete on and off.

>the people who need it won't understand it

That's not true. There's plenty of beginner programmers who will benefit from this.

Just because "they" tried that and it didn't work, doesn't mean doing something of that nature will never work.

Plenty of things we now take for granted did not work in their original iterations. The reason they work today is because there were scientists and engineers who were willing to persevere in finding a solution despite them apparently not working.

I didn't even notice the text in the image at first...

This isn't even about resizing, it's just about text in images becoming part of the prompt and a lack of visibility about what instruction the agent is following.

Ocaml has the pipe operator |> (kinda similar to pipe in Bash) for this purpose

I'm not even sure what the options for the first question mean...

I'm impressed by the naming of colors at the very end.

> I hate doing laundry and cleaning dishes. I still do it, though.

Sure, I see your point. I guess what it comes down to is: what percentage of your life do you spend doing that?

If you don't like doing laundry, then don't start a laundry service business.

>There are plenty of single-threaded programs where I want to be able to occasionally read a piece of information through an immutable reference, but that information can be modified by a different piece of code.

You could do that using Cell or RefCell. I agree that it makes it more cumbersome.

The solution to this problem is to choose a "game" that you 100% believe will positively impact the world.

Thanks, I appreciate it. That's an interesting remark. I find this game is a lot about visual pattern matching.

Is there a good English/French (or English/French/Spanish) layout?

I did some excursion in alternative keyboard layouts, but the English layout I tried was clumsy for French (biggest offender was typing "ue" with one finger) and the French layout I tried was clumsy for English+programming, and that was one of the reasons I stopped trying to learn them.

Currently I use US qwerty when writing English or programming and the Canadian French keyboard (which uses qwerty for the basic letters but moves some special characters and replaces them with accents) when writing French.

(There's actually at least two different Canadian layouts for writing French, both using qwerty for the basic letters but differing on whether accented characters are typed using sequences of keys or a single keys)

I think switching between layouts isn't that big of an issue, as long as all the basic letters are in the same place. So the English/French layout could actually be a family of layouts, as long as the basic letter layout is made to be good enough for both languages.

This is genius! It's like getting the benefits of procrastination without actually procrastinating.

This seems to me that this would work best for deciding what to do within a fixed timeframe. How can this be adapted for things of varying time frames? Certain things don't need to be done today on any given day, but if months go by and i haven't done them, it's bad.

>Such things could end up creating a downwards trend in quality, as more and more of such junk gets posted, absorbed into the model and amplified further.

I feel like a similar thing already happened with YouTube recommendations

I'm really curious what your schedule looks like

Is that like using "continue" in most C-syntax languages?

Are there any models that edit or generate file trees?

What's the best way to learn to implement ideas (and in a way that leads to a profitable business)?

You're forgetting to mention that you need to have a model that is capable of learning that probability distribution.

I often find myself in a situation where someone is monologuing and I'm listening but I'm not very interested and I don't know how to pull out. I wonder if anyone can offer advice.

(I haven't finished reading the article yet; if I find an interesting answer from the article, I'll reply to my own post)

I think it would make sense to imagine the codebase as a graph of some sorts, and the number of bugs as a function of both the number of vertices and edges.

I remember someone suggesting putting every sentence on its own line as a writing tool.

Thank you, that's exactly what I was looking for.

Is there a way to disable the hiding of markdown? I don't like when text moves around

I think a better way to put it is "trying to find flaws" vs "trying to understand". If your goal is to understand, you can explicitly state or show it preemptively. "I'm trying to understand X." "My current understanding is XYZ. Right?" (Note, trying to find flaws has its place as well, but it's more touchy)

Most important is the concept of safety as defined in Crucial Conversations. I would be willing to go into very thorny conversation as long as it feels safe. Safety is fundamentally based on mutual purpose and mutual respect.

>The intention is invisible

If the intention is important, then make it visible. "I'm trying to understand this system and want to make sure it is as reliable as possible". I would then be much more willing to go into such a conversation (assuming I believe you and agree that reliability is indeed important)

"How did you choose this algorithm?" can be ever worse than "why" because you're questioning my "processes", which are closer to my "self", whereas "why" can be interpreted as questioning the outcome.

Perhaps even better, albeit informal: "Why this algorithm?"

For easier grepping

>was mostly received as unpleasant. By this, do you mean the role ended up unpleasant to you?

Talking to customers might uncover some things you haven't even thought about.

>the people who were into FIRE [...] have ended up markedly worse off by their own definition of success than people who took more traditional routes.

Can you please elaborate?