I’ve lost track of the number of times I’ve told it to stop using terms like “evidence boundary” when writing specs. I still have no idea what that means.
2,006 karma · joined January 18, 2008
Strictly speaking, no one needs the Sistine Chapel or the Pietà etc. It would be a shame if they were mulched and recycled, though.
(Yes, I know I could try to submit a PR but I don't have the energy to figure out the Gnome governance process.)
Why would it be? I’m so sick of reading AI slop.
I have to ask - did you use AI to generate this response?
Set the default window width to 1/4 or 1/3 of the screen width (depending on the screen size) and it's easy to keep just the right context visible.
The 39.99MB of ads accompanying the 2KB of text you want to read possibly has less utility to you.
I don’t agree that this is an Apple hating thread. Its commentary on a pretty despicable action that Apple is taking.
It’s not too bad. As others have said, AI makes it easy to get right.
This happens to me way more than I would like. For the life of me, I can't figure out the utility in being able to move my lock screen 1/2 way down the phone and have blank space on top. I don't know what this feature is or how I would activate it if I actually wanted to.
As another commenter pointed out, the poem is a parody of a Yeats poem. An an extract from another of his poems might offer some insight into the reactions...
What need you, being come to sense,
But fumble in a greasy till
And add the halfpence to the pence
And prayer to shivering prayer, until
You have dried the marrow from the bone
I do (and I may get publicly shamed and shunned for admitting I do such a thing): figuring out how to fix parenthesis matching errors in Clojure code that it's generated.
One coding agent I've used is so bad at this that it falls back to rewriting entire functions and will not recognise that it is probably never going to fix the problem. It just keeps burning rainforest trying one stupid approach after another.
Yes, I realise that this is not a philosophical question, even though it is philosophically repugnant (and objectively so). I am being facetious and trying to work through the PTSD I acquired from the above exercise.
(I feel I need to preemptively state that I am being sarcastic.)
I can’t see how to apply logic to naming a colour. It’s fundamentally a perceptual and, dare I say it, emotional process.
I also think your comment is uncharitable and tone deaf.
If this thread continues for a few more levels, I think you’ll end up justifying hiring your own private police force.
Ownership requires that a state exists to enforce your rights. There are tradeoffs with this arrangement, one of which is that the state gets to set boundaries/limits on how you can use the thing you own. Ideally, acting with the best interests of the population. This sometimes includes ensuring areas are off limits to transient inhabitants so that a society can develop.
That's an interesting perspective, given that the legislation is aimed at opening up the big players' platforms/products to more competition by forcing them to eliminate restrictions.
Unless it’s really convoluted, most of the time I’m reading code, I’m concerned with why it’s doing something. Technical consistency helps understand the intent by removing distractions and the need to switch paradigms.