It's quite a different mental model the author has from me.
Cut moves text from the application into a separate application, the clipboard.
So just like if I edit in application A, change to application B and hit undo, I do not expect undo to affect A, I also do not expect undo to affect the pasteboard.
The Ghost Cut works a bit closer to how Excel works, which constantly trips me up. In Excel, I might copy a cell, do some edits, then paste, only to learn that nothing was actually copied. In Excel, copy and cut makes a reference to a selection, and if that selection has been undone or changed at the time of paste, there simply isn't anything to paste.
> It turned out to be possible with fairly basic statistical text generation, because fooling humans is easy.
I don't think it is fair to call a GPT model "fairly basic statistical text generation" - a Markov Text Generator I'd agree can be called basic statistics, but they are not fooling any humans in a Turing test.
> It would've been nice to reserve "AI" for superior human-like intelligence capable of genuine common sense and reasoning.
No, AI would absolutely be apt for describing a computing reasoning like a child
One of the nice things about notebooks (handwritten) is the juxtaposition of data, which makes it a joy to browse through and rediscover old thoughts and ideas.
The only note taking app I’ve found to be fun to browse is Google Keep. I love the layout, I love how things are “out of place”
On a side note, I’ve found Muji notebooks to hit that sweet spot where the paper is nice enough to write down something you want to keep and refer back to, and cheap enough that you can waste pages writing down spur of the moment thoughts and things.
Maybe I drank the cool-aid, but I like the corners on my Mac, and it took a lot of empathy from me to accept “the other” authors filing job, but this looks beautiful.
I’m a very casual reader, nothing heavier than Murakami.
My surprises:
- it’s just 5 judges, who makes the shortlist
- it’s the _same_ 5 judges judging the short list
- there are generally no criteria
- Pulitzer Prizes favors American settings.
- edit: bonus surprise I expected judges to be mostly critics and professors of literature
While I’m not surprised it’s just a few people judging the short list I would have expected more eyes on making the shortlist (editors and publishers make a short list and critics and authors judging it)
I definitely expected different prizes to value things differently. Like a Novel prize winner I would expect to be heavy, with layers and quite frankly a bit intimidating to casual readers, like myself.
I would not expect a criteria to favor a setting. Maybe an authors background (again, I would expect Nobel to favor poor authors who somehow made)
Sure, but when it is for things like "reimbursements, documentation and reporting, gathering and presenting business data. That sort of thing.", I'm not really sure offline is that big a requirement, or that there are that many major assets. Even so, your mobile browser should be able to cache CSS and hero images.
I think 2 things happened to social networks / media:
1) companies had a desire to grow everyone's networks. Early numbers said, people more connected have more engagement, and the larger a user's graph is, the better we can advertise to that user.
But at some point it also changes what you want to post, or if you want to post at all. Do I want my mom to see this joke? That party photo? What about that guy I met on exchange 10 years ago?
I have 1000 connections on Facebook, and all _their_ connections can be exposed to my post. It might as well be public.
2) Professionals are better at posting than amateurs. It turns out that we rather watch a funny update from a comedian we don't know, than an update from a friend trying to be funny. Social networks are not social anymore. They are mostly TV, but instead of channel surfing, you are doom-scrolling videos from professional creators, not updates from friends.
Isn't there a problem with rerouting that you push cars into community-roads that aren't supposed to be supporting commuting traffic?
Wasn't there some articles a few years ago about communities that filled wheelbarrows with phones connected to Waze and moved them slowly down the road, stop waze from routing cars through residential areas?
I don't think it has something "profound" to say, but it also is a good article worth the read.
It's mostly about why some people enjoy working with AI ("I get to build things I can use, that I couldn't build otherwise!)" and others don't ("This code is all slop and nobody understands it, and it makes me sad")
It touches a little bit about those two perspectives in general, which he calls centaurs (in charge of the work) and reverse centaurs (the work is in charge of them)
That quote also resonated with me. It reminded me of "Perl, the write-only language"-meme of yore.
And I think there is a place for perl, just like there is a place for bash one-liners.
The authors example is personal software. The things we write to scratch our own little itches, that do not need to be shared or developed together with other people.
Cut moves text from the application into a separate application, the clipboard.
So just like if I edit in application A, change to application B and hit undo, I do not expect undo to affect A, I also do not expect undo to affect the pasteboard.
The Ghost Cut works a bit closer to how Excel works, which constantly trips me up. In Excel, I might copy a cell, do some edits, then paste, only to learn that nothing was actually copied. In Excel, copy and cut makes a reference to a selection, and if that selection has been undone or changed at the time of paste, there simply isn't anything to paste.