I too loved using em dashes and alt codes like alt-149, my beloved, before LLMs dissolved that pleasure.
Something as simple as an alt code makes me contemplate. As the tech progresses it makes me dislike AI and those that shove it down our throats more and more.
I feel like the sum of my interests and skills from simple, Photoshop edits or learning my most used alt codes, is a lot like how the cellphone replaced some of our ability to remember phone numbers.
The machine does the thing, so why do humans need to do the thing? Or even learn about the thing?
I'm sure there are better examples than the cellphone eliminating the phonebook in my head, but I'm just thinking what are the unseen damages to humans handing over work to machines?
:::: The phone remembers the number, but what if I don't have the phone?
As a previously more involved automation career oriented person, I've heard all the catch phrases of saving the worker, and kill the repetitive tasks. It doesn't look like that ever happens, unless it's something the business world doesn't understand completely, yet have the power and authority to shape. Disgusting.
I think a better example: Everyone thinks about "how should I word this email, what's the tone, who is the audience?" Should I check every detail and work my editing skill muscle or should I simply run an idea, rather than try to form it myself, through an LLM?
Maybe it will sound better if the grammar is perfect and I will have a more effective point rather than how the message was crafted.
No harm in more effective communication, but I do foresee the serious impact the moment people that are relying on the tools lose Internet connection.
We must use these muscles, even if to first formulate a terrible, errored, humanized version. Not to look down upon ourselves with discontent when the AI that corrects it, through their wealth of stolen source material, but to have something to fall back on when the power goes out.
I digress, these RFCs are a good proposal without any strength. Just look at the theft to train these models. The models will strive to become useful to those that rely on them and just adopt the new way of writing.
I think the rant is more constructive when directed towards how companies are ran into the ground and the workers are the ones to take the hits. Not the c-suite or big decision makers, that made bad decisions.
There are some solid solutions. In game development, why not collect the resources that someone has made; code, models, animations, etc and reuse them to rapidly develop new ideas. Of course some aesthetic choices will not merge correctly with each other but scripts can be easier and sometimes interchangeable. Maybe more game development companies need to focus on these aspects if they already don't; Collecting resources they've already spent money on for moonshot ideas.
Or branching employees off into teams to make moonshot games instead of simply laying them off. After big, failed ideas by the game studio, instead of removing sudo-decay and starting over, why not bring those already trained people with you and start building a solutions culture? And maybe set a challenge to see who can create the best games in these makeshift, small teams -- any number of them could eventually become a major hit for the company.
It seems like the employees that are expendable would have the more interesting ideas and skills and they're never really valued to their potentials.
With that said seeing studios like blizzard and how they hire specialists -- that doesn't really translate to game development as a whole, even if the industry itself seems like a cash grab for those at the top.
Wasn't there a documented operation that JFK didn't want to sign/rejected, that pertained to the CIA wanting to set up false flags to justify war against Cuba?
Knowing nothing much about this there are still some obvious points to make.
The CIA will not be one singular entity of one mind and focus. There will be factions in that organisation, there will be rogue elements. There does not have to be a grand master plan but there could be. There does not have to be uniform competence and there will not be. Operations go wrong all the time. Pieces will be moved into position at vast expense then not used for so many possible reasons. Further if it were a cia operation (and I have no idea about that) it may not have been intended to actually kill anyone and Oswald surprised people by his effectiveness.
All sorts of wild stuff is plausible and you need evidence to assess it. Every huckster will trade on the doubt, there will be wishful thinking and genuine, directed official misinformation. Treating the CIA as an entity all marching in lock-step of one mind and purpose is an assumption that stretches plausibility and certainly requires evidence. Chaos is almost certainly a major factor in any explanation and indeed counts as the entirety of the official version of what happened and its aftermath.
Yep! You need a kind of review process and some incentives. Not that difficult to implement.
You give several people the same frame to draw, then you just have everyone pick their favourite. The one with the least votes can be temporarily shadow banned from their next drawing appearing as an option. Alternatively, you can reward the one with the most votes.
But honestly, maybe just allowing people to choose the frame they like might be enough and you don't even need to do much more.
Awesome Tapes from Africa [0]is a well known one. There's also a tape archive of Somali music that resulted in this CD compilation [1] although I forget the name of the actual archive site.
As a generalist myself, focusing and increasing your proficiency, in less areas really helps. It's excellent to be well rounded and be able to grab ideas that connect from a bunch of different places due to being so versatile, but sometimes it takes a mental toll.
As another poster said, product management seems like a good fit. Don't need to be an expert of one thing, as you should be managing the experts.
If you ever do start a new startup, I would be interested in working with you.
This little project was developed I believe within a Google team, with more analogies to help you understand certain concepts, or explain them easier for your less technical comrades.
Enter at your own risk, ATM it comes up as unsecure website.
Something as simple as an alt code makes me contemplate. As the tech progresses it makes me dislike AI and those that shove it down our throats more and more.
I feel like the sum of my interests and skills from simple, Photoshop edits or learning my most used alt codes, is a lot like how the cellphone replaced some of our ability to remember phone numbers.
The machine does the thing, so why do humans need to do the thing? Or even learn about the thing?
I'm sure there are better examples than the cellphone eliminating the phonebook in my head, but I'm just thinking what are the unseen damages to humans handing over work to machines?
:::: The phone remembers the number, but what if I don't have the phone?
As a previously more involved automation career oriented person, I've heard all the catch phrases of saving the worker, and kill the repetitive tasks. It doesn't look like that ever happens, unless it's something the business world doesn't understand completely, yet have the power and authority to shape. Disgusting.
I think a better example: Everyone thinks about "how should I word this email, what's the tone, who is the audience?" Should I check every detail and work my editing skill muscle or should I simply run an idea, rather than try to form it myself, through an LLM?
Maybe it will sound better if the grammar is perfect and I will have a more effective point rather than how the message was crafted.
No harm in more effective communication, but I do foresee the serious impact the moment people that are relying on the tools lose Internet connection.
We must use these muscles, even if to first formulate a terrible, errored, humanized version. Not to look down upon ourselves with discontent when the AI that corrects it, through their wealth of stolen source material, but to have something to fall back on when the power goes out.
I digress, these RFCs are a good proposal without any strength. Just look at the theft to train these models. The models will strive to become useful to those that rely on them and just adopt the new way of writing.
reply