I think you don't understand how tiring it is to review full-llm code. I think banning it temporarily until people calm down with AI-generated PRs is a very sane solution. If it is still the solution in 3 years, maybe you would have a point then.
I only manage 3 'new' hires and I am of the mind of banning AI usage myself despite my heavy usage (the new hires don't level up, that's my main issue now, but the reviewing loops and the shit that got through our reviews are also issues).
I'm sorry but if elimination of crippling disease sounds like eugenics to you, then you should deeply think about your moral compass. Comparing autism (I guess some mild form since you put it next to ADHD) and ADHD to Down's syndrome shows that you are completely clueless. I'm sorry for the harsh tone but your comment is absolutely awful and has zero empathy towards people (and their caretakers) suffering from condition much worse than what you are going through.
Yes, BUT: Ubisoft's is not actually a click through and the amount of text on it means they show it for quite a long time, with no way to click past, and THAT is fucking obnoxious.
I'm quite glad those warnings exist, don't get me wrong. I am not en epileptic, please do not try and force me to read your 3 paragraphs about epilepsy kthnx.
The point is that, as the defender, you only have to find each hole once, while the attacker can spend an infinite amount of tokens trying to find more holes, that are increasingly harder to find and might, eventually, not exist at all. The defender can do that too, of course, but being in the defense, there is value in not being able to uncover new holes (your system keeps working, ostensibly) while as the attacker that's simply how you fail.
Using a virtual filesystem to minify source code and let the LLM evolve in the minified space gives surprisingly good results and reduce tokens by 20 to 40% (depends on the language, python for instance)
There’s a strong argument for paper computer, in the sense that we have evolved to think in space and with our body (Barbara Tversky’s work springs to mind). The cognitive load of parsing our thoughts, collaborating on ideas through digital interfaces is not insignificant, and changes the nature of the kind of combinatorial thinking required to externalise and socialise ideas, organise thoughts and structure work. I think AI created a huge opportunity for this kind of ambient association with computational power that over time can make the interface recede into the analogue rather than require us to engage with the digital.
I question the idea of pastoralism though, I would argue this is another kind of construct. Laurel Hatcher Ulrich’s ‘age of homespun’ talks about this in detail, and how handcraft revivals were an expression of fear or anxiety about the radical changes brought about by industrialisation, and became a sort of myth making device for the rejection of technological overlords.
In any case, Paper Computer charts neat reformulation of the personal computer into something more interesting. If all individual computing tasks become distributed back into real spaces, objects and physically manipulable media it becomes more of an interpersonal computer, and distributed computing power can be pushed to things that don’t ordinarily engage with computational tasks such as wind or plants or anything within the shared working environment.
I know what one does manually, but how does stack make decisions here when there’s a conflict? The reason we use a rebase flow is to allow for adjusting commits that are no longer valid.
I vibed up a chrome extension that sets a timer, hides shorts, redirects home to subscriptions, and hides comments and recommendations.
It’s all toggleable so I don’t disable the extension when I do want some neuronal junk food. But just the micro friction being added back in is such a huge help to becoming more aware when using it.
What about the impact of EMF pollution? The book "the invisible rainbow' goes into that, though I don't expect this type of position to be well received in HN. I find it very healthy that this type of "invisible" pollution gets at least some discussion, however. We have to start somewhere.
