dogleash

I wouldn't advocate for using different tools, but everyone should be able to reason about the machine instructions underlying their code. Both in the immediate sense of the assembly a simple function turns into, and the tricks language runtimes use to enable their neat features.

The attitude that things are magic is poison. There is a difference between feeling confident something is comprehensible and not yet needing to go learn it, vs resigning to a position of powerlessness.

This school district has had such a good track record with technology. I can't imagine ill-conceived, under-cooked ostensibly good intentions could lead to bad outcomes. Especially not there.

I think it's pretty normal to be able to reflect on the difference in life skills between myself and those I see in others. There are things I've struggled with throughout adulthood because through some happenstance I was able to avoid the class of challenge as a child.

I didn't learn how to study until my 20s. I didn't have will-power over eating and exercise until my body changed around 30 and I suddenly got fat, then I talked with friends that teased me for being less skilled at something than a teenage version of themselves.

What's the saying: someone who's never smoked doesn't have to learn how to quit smoking?

Entering the workforce happens at an age where people have built (some more rudimentary than others) a level of understanding and self control regarding delayed gratification and Type II fun.

Did you have the kind of life where you were never really challenged to build that skillset, or is the mental stimulation so strong for you when you use AI that it overcomes executive function?

I'm sure whatever your role at facebook is, it is very important. There are people who recognize how valuable your contributions were/are/will be. You probably won't find that validation on HN.

If this is the starting thought, I don't know how you wrap back around to publishing and advertising the generated code.

Either you create the best possible mac markdown viewer and should share it as that, orthogonal to any statement of AI use. Or you're just adding to the noise of tools available online. Where other people should ignore your work, and go slopcode their own markdown viewer.

They already pick and choose. They have not decided to sit outside of it. Any claim about them not getting involved should be read as tacit approval. Because we know they will drop users they sufficiently disapprove of.

This is unintentionally hilarious. You're not arguing the moral point, you're using the same kind of reasoning that leads to gay conversion therapy. It roughly equates to: "that's not in accord with my social norms, therefore you need professional intervention."

(Perfunctory disclaimer that I don't support caning. I am not arguing for it, I am only pointing out problems with a statement against it.)

So, like what already happens when my boss asks claude something and I have to pick up the pieces. Except now it's everything he slops about the topic, not just the ones we discuss later?

B: "You are still perfectly capable of having fun in life"

I don't really get how B follows from A. B is true, but A wasn't implying not-B.

Nice passive aggressive dig!

Very very few orators can successfully pull off "just fix your problems bro" as anything beyond a generic kick in the pants for the people presently predispositioned to be motivated by one.

I think turning a blind eye to our colleagues' work as if it's morally neutral is what keeps us in that pit.

I dare say those are the point rather than an side property of writing about quacks' downfalls.

The media serves non-zero inoculation effect against quacks, but their approach to coverage is much more self-indulgent than what anyone brainstorming a coverage approach to maximize their readers' heath literacy would create.

They tried to punch up a deliverable and didn't even check that their new version served the purpose of that deliverable.

If parent poster's story is even half true, I'm reminded of the phrase "reckless disregard for the truth." This is one of the vast majority of times where it's perfectly legal to be reckless with the truth, but I can't think of a more succinct description of core problem.

I had a meeting with IT where I was worried they were finally coming after my proxmox box they "didn't know about". Turns out they saw their vmware bill and suddenly had questions.

Listen here, if there is a networking technology or feature that I wasn't forced learn when I half-assed a SOHO router config in 2005, then it shouldn't exist at all.

Tina Fey: Laughter. You can prompt applause with a sign. My friend, SNL writer Seth Meyers, coined the term clapter, which is when you do a political joke and people go, "Woo-hoo." It means they sort of approve but didn't really like it that much. You hear a lot of that on [whispers] The Daily Show.

Obviously we can't see that people aren't genuinely falling out of their seats laughing when that headline get rolled out again. There's no way argue that someone doesn't earnestly think bad (or tired) jokes make effective satire.

I don't think a whinge is a joke just because it has the shape of a joke and a point I like. Overall, I agree with you. But you'll never convince anybody.

If twitter ever became what he says he wants, he'd quit using it within a month. He already has the option to close twitter and seek out experts' writing. Why is he choosing to bask in the emotions generated by people being wrong on twitter?

It's like listening to a friend complain about twitter being "full of" content that you rarely/never see on your feed. Nah, that's their algorithm and they just told you exactly who they are.

It does seem like a roundabout way of saying "but what if full sending on AI didn't have downsides, tho?"

Just phrased in a way that can put the onus on the other party with a perfect weasel word qualifier like "most important".

Or are they just trying to chat online about the purchase decision topic at hand?

Your two posts are maybe the most "AI enthusiast sounds like they're on cocaine" posts I've ever seen. And this is Hacker News. The bar is pretty high.

It's also a nasty tool used to dismiss criticism by tearing people down in work-friendly language.

Software does employ a lot turds that it shouldn't. We been knowing this. Impossible to ignore following the 2010s push to expand the hiring pool. Newcomers didn't even pretend to try or care.

Convenient that we're suddenly calling them out now. At the same time there's a need to indiscriminately invalidate professional-informed opinions.

No it's not.

It's a measure of what people want accomplished, are least interested in doing themselves, and feel capable of reviewing enough to delegate to a known lair.

I remember cron jobs that did what systemd-tmpfiles-clean does before it existed. All unix daemons using /tmp run the risk of misusing /tmp. I don't know snap well enough to say anything about it makes it uniquely more susceptible to that.

And the arguments for it don't promise to fight tooth and nail not to make sure it's not slippery. If the slope does turn out to be slippery, today's proponents will be tomorrow's Hindsight Harrys (e.g. "the cat's already out of the bag, if you cared so much you should have fought this back when we all saw it coming").