bumpusoot

As someone who rewatched it recently, I do not recall that at all.

I don't work in actual software development, though I do a little of it amongst other work.

When I need to slop out a one-time snippet or short script to do something, which I have to do like 10 times a day, it takes me like 3-20 minutes. ChatGPT 4 does it near-perfectly, takes one minute, and usually teaches me something on the way.

Plus when I need to work out how the fuck GDB works to debug shit, it's an absolute lifesaver. The manual is very long and remembering all the memory examination commands is hard.

If you're ever working on code over ~100 lines a long, then I basically agree as it takes massive debugging and is poorly factored to the point of being worthless. But for arcane, well-documented commands (ie obscure programming languages and linux tools), and short blasts of code, it's genuinely incredibly useful on a daily basis.

I thought we rightfully blew up this comm, apparently not.

I think this is a disingenuous take. Yes, artists do valuable work and still do. But to say "everyone is able to do art" intentionally misses the point that not everyone is able to do art well enough to communicate intention. If the developer drew a bunch of stick figures, everyone would hate it.

Sure Marx was clever, but did he ever consider supply and demand?

I promise this isn't true. AI is absolutely a scam in the sense that it's overhype as fuck, but LLMs are frequently of practical use to me when doing basically anything technical. It has helped me solve real-life problems that actually materially helps others.

I think anything I'd have to say on this specific matter has already been said and addressed. I know being attacked like this can be unpleasant, but I think you made a constructive conversation out of the matter, here.

I'll instead just say, as a long-term user with a couple alts, I've always really liked your posts. I admire your ability to take others' points on board, and agree a lot with your points on accuracy being important and the dangers of users being quick-to-dunk. Thanks for being a consistently cool poster

I'm all for it as an idea, but "meltdown-proof" really makes me think of "unsinkable". It's quite a hubristic description just begging to be proven wrong.

Leekspin cosplay

I reckon you can do bubble and squeak but sub out cabbage for leeks

I think it's kind of an already argued point that most people conceded decades ago, what's there to talk about?

Not long ago, it used to be your money was worth a set amount of gold, tangible gold bullion you were guaranteed you could get for your dollar, but now it's fiat. And fiat is a just a euphemism for "its imaginary". Not that gold bullion has a great practical value either.

I personally don't think I post anything that's likely to be cracked down upon. But I still largely agree, and I think that's a far more reasonable concern and good reason to opsec, depending on what you're putting out there.