wtetzner

I suspect a blindfolded passenger might prefer the Sienna. I can imagine it might be easier to get carsick blindfolded in a 911.

But also, as a driver, there is a clear difference between a Sienna and a 911. The differences are objective, but of course the preferences are subjective.

The entire discussion was centered around whether or not using AI to detect AI content would work, or if it would create false positives that harm human content creators.

It could work "well enough" for YouTube to consider it a success while still harming a fairly large number of content creators.

> All they need to do is "randomly" label 99,999 of every 100,000 as AI and they'll be right 99.999% of the time.

Unfortunately that could still be true while labeling all human-crafted content as AI-created.

> Wouldn't the human creators be the biggest advocates of labeling, so that their content can be more easily found among the AI dross?

Only if it actually works

> older hardware and often very inexpensively

What makes you think demand won't drive those prices up as well? And this is more than just gaming, the Steam Deck prices are increased due to the increase cost of general components like RAM, which impacts machines used to do work as well.

> I do not think we understand consciousness enough to rule out what those brains are experiencing.

I would. If it's mandatory just include it in the advertised food prices.

Doesn't Python support futures?

    with ThreadPoolExecutor() as executor:
        one, two = executor.map(lambda f: f(), [callOne, callTwo])

I'm sure you could write a nicer helper function that's more similar to gather as well.

Effects solve it in the sense that the caller can handle the effects to work however they like, making the functions that use the effects more reusable.

E.g., if you install IO handlers that are async and call a function that does IO, it's now an async function.

Yes, `?` automatically does `.into()`.

There are plenty of reasons you can complain about Rust's error handling, but "proliferation of error types" feels like a misunderstanding of how Rust error handling works in the first place.

This sounds disingenuous. They explained why the language doesn't force stack traces on all errors, and then explained how to get them if you want them.

Except anyhow is compatible in that direction. io::Error and thiserror types will automatically convert to anyhow errors.

> You act like cheating is new to video games??

No, I think the point is that with AI the existing anti-cheat measures can simply be avoided by letting the AI play through the same interface as a human. Therefore anti-cheat kernel modules will no longer be useful, and will no longer be a reason to stay on Windows.

The point is that these projects had worth because of what the programmer got out of the learning process, not because of the end result.

> I find a lot of the AI skepticism to be totally unfalsifiable.

A lot of the discourse around AI in general is unfalsifiable. It's just a bunch of people "predicting" the future. Seems smarter to just avoid making assumptions about it at this point.

I think the problem is that we're using LLMs to do too much of the work. We should aim to design agents that use the LLM as the thinnest possible layer to translate the natural language intent into a deterministic process, minimizing round trips to the LLM as much as possible.

Given that the AI companies are still operating at a loss and running on investor money, I'm not sure it's actually driven by consumer choice.

I don't know why people find it so confusing. I don't remember any kids I knew at the time being confused by it.

It just provides you with two different ways to hold it: one where you're using the D-Pad, and one where you're using the analog stick.

I'm not claiming it was the pinnacle of controller design or anything, but it was fine.

Yeah, even in the US they were even on sale on multiple occasions.

This is the chicken-and-egg problem though. If you don't get the Linux/Steam Deck audience large enough first, then that tradeoff won't be worth it to developers.

It's on the cart page, before you check out. And I do agree that it should be much more front-and-center, rather than the sort of fine-print thing they have now.

https://imgur.com/a/D1LKUUi

I'm pretty sure just riding in a car is more dangerous.

So publish the game on your own website? Why do you need to use Steam in this case?

If they're suffering greatly to make ends meet, then why use Steam at all? The only reason I can think of is that Steam provides a great customer experience, making that 30% worth it for the developers.

Was it outlawed in the 50s? I remember getting baseball cards with gum in the 90s...

The problem with Apple is not the 30% cut, it's that you're not allowed to use other app stores or install apps without their store.

When I check out on Steam it displays this text to me:

> A purchase of a digital product grants a license for the product on Steam.

There isn't much they can do to foster native Linux support beyond trying to increase the number of people gaming on Linux. It's a chicken-and-egg problem, and you need to make the platform desirable to developers before they will start developing for it.

They do let you write in a higher-level language, but it's not really analogous to a higher-level programming language. The ambiguity and lack of determinism makes prompting fundamentally different from using a high level programming language.

The JavaScript developers are checking in JavaScript code that they ostensibly understand. That is not the same as prompting an LLM to generate Zig that they don't understand, and expecting someone to merge it.