I'm one of those people who get annoyed if it's too loose. But I can just impose that restriction on myself and look down on people who rely on obscure words.
it sounds like the author (and you?) are using the CLI? I've found the mac desktop app to be great, or at least solve many complaints I had with the terminal version.
I live in Sausalito just north of SF. We have a few cameras on the way into town. Seeing this map actually makes me feel safer. Sure there are hypothetical privacy issues, but for me they're easily outweighed by safety. I don't really get the issue. Ideally this information would be available to law enforcement, but would require a warrant. Is the problem that they can access all of this data without a warrant now?
Ya that's a good point for competitive scrabble. However today I think a lot of people's main exposure to Scrabble comes from WordsWithFriends (and recently, the new NYT games version). In those games, there's no penalty for getting a wrong word, it just won't let you play it. In that context, I at least think it would be nice to have a setting with a more limited list... it could be like Chess timed variants.
It's obviously an impossible challenge to draw those contours in language. Wordle did pretty well though! And going the other direction, just allowing everything that could possibly a word, just starts getting ridiculous.
You didn't try them!? If you have the ChaptGPT app it's super simple and worth a try. I talk to it in French a lot. It gets tedious though, because after almost every question it tries to end the conversation with "let me know if I can do anything else to help". I really want it to pretend to be curious and continue the conversation. I've thought that this could be fixed with some better prompting, so I'm excited to try out this app.
we have them for our cats, they're great. Sometimes they're hiding in bushes and we don't realize they're 10 ft away. Other times they're down by the neighbor's house. It's not perfect but it tells us which direction more or less. And definitely more peace of mind if they ever got lost. They
They make breakaway collars so if they get caught on something it won't trap them.
Congrats! I never stopped coding, but AI makes it way more productive and fun for sure.
$100 seems like a lot. I guess if you think about it compared to dev salaries, it's nothing. But for $10 per month copilot you can get some pretty great results too.
What about the era of flash cartoons? Remember "End of Ze World"? In a way that's throwaway crap. Or it could have been written as a comic strip, or animated manually. But Flash kinda opened up this whole new world of games and animation. AI is doing the same.
One that comes to mind is a sort of podcast-style of two cats having a conversation, and in each "episode" there's some punchline where they end up laughing about some cat stereotype. Definitely low quality garbage, but I guess what I mean by "barrier of entry" (sorry for the buzzword), is just that this is going to enable a new generation of content, memes, whatever you want to call it.
People always like telling stories. Books, comic strips, movies, they're all just telling a story with a different amount of it left up to the viewer's imagination. Lowering the barrier to entry for this type of stuff is so cool.
I think you have to be pretty pessimistic to not just think it's really cool. You can find issues with it for sure, and maybe argue that those issues outweigh the benefit, but hard to say it's not going to be fun for some people.
For sure! It's an interesting point. But from an economic point of view, it's better for consumers if there are clean boundaries and every layer is commoditized.
And you have to have a monopoly though? Farms provide the most value to the world but there's so much competition that it's commoditized, so as far as I know there's no super valuable farms... Hopefully the same thing happens with autonomous cars, cloud computing, etc.
That's how competition should work. Every layer should have multiple providers until the companies get all of their profits squeezed away and users get the best possible price.
Definitely true in practice, but I don't think we want discretion. What I mean though is as a deterrent, you can either have a "fair" fine that's enforced 100% of the time, or 2x the "fair" amount with 50% enforcement, etc. When it's 100x the "fair" amount with 1% enforcement, and you see everyone else not being enforced, it feels unfair.
That's a pretty extreme example, maybe the idea doesn't hold as much there. But yeah, if 99% of murders weren't prosecuted, the 1% who get charged might feel like they were singled out (and maybe they were, because of some bias or discrimination). Again, 100% enforcement is better.
It feels less fair though. When everyone is driving x mph over the limit but only you get pulled over, it sucks. So I agree for efficiency of enforcement, but I'd rather see 100% enforcement (automated if possible), with more warnings and lower penalties.