160 karma · joined August 10, 2022
Why do you say that?
I think you were partially kidding, but also half serious. What’s the issue with returning dictionaries, and why should we be returning dataclasses instead?
Asking for my own learning.
For example, if Evernote had limited the free tier to 99 notes and syncing with 2 devices. That’s usable enough for a user to get a feel for whether they like it or not, but without an expectation that the free tier could support all their needs for note generation and storage.
The problem comes when the free tier is so restraint-free that people begin to use it as a daily driver without ever expecting to upgrade to a paid tier. At that point, the company has boxed themselves into a situation with users who generate costs but no corresponding revenues. Trying to convert _those_ users into paying customers is difficult or impossible, in my opinion.
At least, they used to be. I haven’t checked recently, but this was the case for many years. Don’t know if they’ve changed anything recently.
The HUD could overlay SKU, product description, weight, volume, etc — directly onto the actual item in the storage rack.
Actually, tables in org mode have function capability like Excel too. Obviously not the full, extensive capabilities of Excel, but they are far more than simply text formatted as a table.
And many subreddits have said they’ll be private indefinitely, not just 2 days.
Reddit: You will now pay us $20 million per year or we’re shutting you down. You have 30 days notice. Apollo: If Apollo is really costing you $20 million per year, you could pay us $10 million to stop, and you’d come out way ahead! I’m half joking.
Reddit: Are you threatening us?!
Apollo: No, I was just jokingly making a point.
Reddit: “Oh, I misunderstood. I immediately apologize.”
Reddit (to mods publicly): This guy is threatening us!
=======
Wait, what?
Who’s threatening who????
The numbers he posted seem to add up.
Out of curiosity, have you ever tried developing DSLs in Racket? One of its explicit reasons for existence is to enable fast development of custom DSLs.
Could you expand on why this is so powerful for you?
Not doubting it’s power, but I’m having a hard time understanding _why_ it’s so powerful for some people.
He isn’t opposed to paying for API access, but he feels the rates they are charging are exorbitant to the point of being designed to forcel 3rd party apps out of business, not extract value from them.
What is “the spider man thing”? Sounds like an interesting concept I’m not familiar with.
Also, why do you think DSLs are a bad idea? I’ve only ever heard the claim that they are a game-changer, but it’s never been clear to me why. So I’d love to hear the counter argument.
For example, sometimes the top answer is long and requires a few minutes of reading, sometimes there are corrections in the replies that need to be read, and sometimes I don’t fully understand it and therefore need to read multiple replies.
This can easily take up 5 - 15 minutes, versus 1-5 minutes for ChatGPT.
Additionally, I find value in NOT having to keep myself from getting distracted by the tons of other highly interesting things on Stack Overflow. It can be nice to have that focused, text-only, distraction-free dialogue that ChatGPT provides.
1. Time — for me to search Google and then read anywhere from 1-10 links to get an answer typically takes anywhere from 5 - 30 minutes. The average is probably 10-15 minutes. But using ChatGPT takes less than 1 minute.
2. Specificity — ChatGPT gives me answers to more specific questions, with no fluff text to read through, no ads, no redirects, no links that appear to answer my specific question but actually don’t when I click on them and read them. I get a specific answer to a specific question.
3. Interaction — If I have follow-up questions and/or need clarification or alternative options/solutions I can simply ask ChatGPT and it answers. I often find that getting answers to followup questions via web search takes even longer than the original search.
These all make it worth it for me. And that still doesn’t touch on all the other use cases that search engines don’t do at all.
The most recently used app is usually immediately to the left of the one you’re currently in.
On older iPhones with the Home button, double tap the Home button to get to the app switcher.
Then who designs, builds, and maintains THOSE AI & robots? It can’t be “AI & robots” all the way down.
>My belief is that most likely AI will hit another roadblock soon, following a "punctuated equilibrium" model so there will still be a large number of non-automatable jobs.
I agree (although it may or may not be “soon”). As history has shown us, technology advancements just cause us to reimagine possibilities and start solving problems that were previously impossible.
For example, as computers have gone from a few bytes of RAM to billions of bytes of memory, humans didn’t say, “ok, we’re all set now.” — we invented whole new classes of software that do all kinds of things unimaginable to the early computer scientists.
The same will happen with AI and robots.
I’m curious because it seems like perhaps providing longer, detailed prompts (and then iterating) might be the best approach for getting coding help.
Thoughts?
I usually prompt it with short questions, but I recently saw a video where the person provided a lengthy (50 - 150 words) prompts detailing the requirements for what they were requesting. I was shocked at the results. (Still required iterations of corrections/modifications though)
I haven’t tried it myself yet, but it’s an avenue that might yield better results than what you’ve experienced — perhaps even vastly better results.
You can even prompt it to write a unit test for the function it wrote.
As for your concerns about code errors, I’ve found that you have to approach the coding support as an iterative process, where you request code, and then ask it to improve or correct the result it just gave. You can even prompt it to check its previous result for errors.
Additionally, people who hold this belief fail to realize that “I don’t want to work.” ACTUALLY means “I want others to work so I don’t have to.”
For example, how are you going to eat? You are either going to grow, cultivate, and harvest your own food (i.e. work) or you’re expecting others to do that work for you.
Oh, you say it can be “automated”? Well, who’s going to design, build, and maintain the automating machine? That’s all work too!
Can you elaborate?
It’s so strange that so many people can have completely different experiences with the same software.