wallfacer's comments

One core assertion seems less true every day:

> The intelligence (knowing what a "risk" actually means) still requires human governance.

Less and less. Why do you trust a human who’s considered 5000 assessments to better understand “risks” and process the next 50 better than the LLM who has internalized untold millions of assessments?

Why can’t they make a custom menu of my most used buttons? That would be real user customization, not a reel of my top listened songs. Or better still, let me make my own Player layout.

Today, I find the UI downgrade buries Offline, Playback, Settings, One more layer deeper, behind a circle that has the first letter of my username.

It is not substantiated that all desires arise from an associated, achievable need.

I need food so I desire food and I eat to satisfy it.

I desire to have perfect love and relationships, but can’t seem to achieve it.

But if I cannot find a perfect slice of pizza, g-d exists and another world follows this one where the pizza is truly satisfying?

Believe whatever you like, but realize Faith is required for this to follow that. Logic won’t do it for you alone.

The entire argument follows from a single incredible, unsubstantiated assumption, that “creatures are not born with desires unless satisfaction for those desires exists.”

If the top ten takeaways are ok using incredibly vaporous, non-sensical phrasing why would I dig any deeper?

“the number of AI incidents and controversies has increased 26 times since 2012”

Ok but how many “incidents,” also detectably fake deepfakes and call-monitoring inmates are top examples of misuse? Naive.

“BLOOM’s training run emitted 25 times more carbon than a single air traveler on a one-way trip from New York to San Francisco”

What does this mean? That sounds like a very small amount to me but the conclusion is that’s a huge environmental impact. No, I read, for the carbon cost of decommissioning one old jet, we can have a new LLM.

If any Spotify devs are here, please let me explore and add songs, artists and albums to my library without “hearting” it.

I often just want to follow up later by “adding to my library,” and it feels weird to “LOVE” it before ever hearing it. I really feel pain when I hear something terrible that I’ve already “liked” and consider the impacts to my algorithm.

Please distinguish between “like” and “save.”

A simple “plus sign” or really any other symbol that signifies “adding to a collection” without “liking” connotations (stars are out too).

Qualitative data can be valuable data, even in this quantitative age.

Tough choice between Soap and hot takes on HN :P

However, near-instant access to the entirety of humanities’ collective information vs a dishwasher? I’m fine washing dishes by hand.

Mapping a novel virus genome and formulating an RNA-based vaccine in mere weeks vs “look how many dams and bridges we can build”?

You know what happens when you compound incremental progress? Huge advancements.

Progress is real, and it’s only getting faster as exponential tech from the past few decades is just now hitting “whole numbers” and converging.

Of course, it’s not fundamentally inevitable, but the future is decided by the possible-ists.

Please take the time to read the latest works by Diamandis and Kotler, Kevin Kelly, Steven Pinker, and Harari.

I cannot imagine your perspective will still be the same after so much history, theory, and real-world examples beyond the point by point counters you’re receiving as replies.

Yes, these are also not exclusive and many jobs evolve, of course. If you think up something people want and build it, you might then spend time improving it. Or you might let others do that while you go back and build something new again.

You get to choose what you do. And as another commenter suggested you get to choose your values too.

Use your time.

For professional development, I highly suggest a Kolbe A index assessment to better identify your natural energies for “doing things” (working style) and learn to harness those rather than force them to comply with external notions of “how it should be done.” I have considered mine daily for 7 years.

It seems you are actively exploring the type of job you direct your attention towards and (hopefully) derive fulfillment from, which is way more tractable than your conative personality.

Potentially more helpful categories than “problem solver” and “indie/ maker,” which are certainly not exclusive, might be these job types: producing, improving, building, or thinking (source: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20130502173937-15454-there-ar...).

Good luck!

When I owned a Saab I loved it. The folks over at Taliaferro made it easy to own and between them and another local mechanic, I never had repair issues. AFAIK, they are still doing high-performance tuning with custom-parts manufacturing. https://www.genuinesaab.com/

You still get media queries.

You get 1 class apply to many nodes relationship.

You only write the css once more (or never again if you use tailwind or tachyons) and reuse it many times.

More thoughtful reply to similar question from Adam Morse of tachyons: https://github.com/tachyons-css/tachyons/issues/12#issuecomm...

I’m a person who finds out what I’m thinking as I speak. Iterating towards an idea with confidence in each turn. Even if you end up in the vicinity of where you started, problem not actually solved, you demonstrate how you move through problem space.

Similar to another comment I read comparing interviews to athletic tryouts and competition, which tries to assess how a body moves through physical space.

“There's some amount of discomfort I'd be willing to sustain if I felt it they were beneficial, but I also find they're rarely worth the bother.”

Also sums up my feeling of reading this author.

I only read the first two paragraphs and determined this article needs unit and integration tests.

Assert sentences:

  Have noun, verb, and subject

  Are not run-ons

  Do not contain typos that render them unintelligible

My mom suggested I buy NES Monopoly when I was about 10. I protested at first, but I quickly fell in love and played endlessly.

Monopoly is not a well-designed game to play with people but, surprisingly, amazing and interesting to play against an 8-bit computer.