The whole website was prompted. You can tell by the overload of emoji's on the page and every section having cards with hover effects. It's classic LLM design.
Funnily enough, while I definitely prompted but finding other website designs I liked and color schemes. I specifically wanted the hover effects because I love quirky animations. On the garden in the app try holding on a flower/ seed or click on a butterfly and enjoy the Easter egg ;)
Probably because its not War and Peace. It's the hook for some app you're probably going top spend all of 2 minutes on deciding whether it may or may not be functionally useful, and that equation is going to be largely solved independent of the quality of that marketing copy.
How do you know that the author is capable of communicating fluently in english?
What if it were the case the the author was so excited about sharing a project but didn't know how to properly explained it and so took the extra effort to learn how to get a piece of software to explain it for them?
Would that then satisfy your requirement that the human behind the project has done enough work to earn your interest?
But AI provides the illusion of communication. Since the AI has no direct access to the user's brain, and has to go off the words they provide, if we're assuming that the person isn't capable generating words that accurately communicate their thoughts, the AI is getting all its information from the same flawed words we'd have access to if they didn't use AI, but destroying any signal encoded in the specific mistakes or choices they've made in its process of shaping their thoughts into something more polished.
AIs don't violate entropy, and can't create information from nothing. They can interpret, and expand, and maybe, just maybe, tease out meaning that a human would have missed. But the more sensitively they're tuned to pick up on small nuances, they more likely they're going to interpret a pattern that isn't there, and the more they're tuned to avoid over-interpretation, the more likely they are to miss something that is there, the same as how a human can aim to interpret something with high or low context.
The difference is, by filtering it through an AI, you're taking that capability out of other people's hands, you're (often intentionally) flattening and damaging signals people usually use to choose how to distribute their attention (often with the cry of "But it's not fair that people want to spend their attention on things that I'm not good at, I have to use AI to convince people to look at my work that they would prefer not to!!"), and when you do that without acknowledging the use of AI, it feels a lot like you don't care about any negative effects your actions have on the existing ecosystems of human creativity and communication, and you're going to get an appropriately hostile response.
> How do you know that the author is capable of communicating fluently in english?
Irrelevant; they can do the best they can and I'll do the best I can.
If the best they can do is have it ghost-written, then the best that I will do is not read it.
> What if it were the case the the author was so excited about sharing a project but didn't know how to properly explained it and so took the extra effort to learn how to get a piece of software to explain it for them?
That's not extra effort, that's less effort.
> Would that then satisfy your requirement that the human behind the project has done enough work to earn your interest?
Look, if someone isn't going to bother to write something, why would others bother to read it?
Yep, that was actually a placeholder (eventually with real people, and now soon with 500 downloads!) I didn’t comment out properly hence what someone else pointed out with the html commenting. Mistakes happen and I agree I should do a better job to proof read :)
AI tends to be a buzz kill on products because it sends the signal "i can't be bothered to craft this deliberately."
So why then should we bother to interact with the product deliberately.
Around here most know how hard and time consuming it is to ship a production grade experience. AI helps a ton. it's not "wrong" per say, but it undeniably leaves an odor.
1. Makes no sense.
2. not true.
3. You can turn features you don't like off, like the AI
4. False. The bootloader is not locked. Linux does work, but it would be nice if they activly worked on kernel modules for their hardware.
5. Macbooks have the longest shelf life of any consumer PC. Period.
They have a nice simple explanation. But the biochemistry of it I’m guessing is anything but simple. I’ve never heard of three way junctions in DNA before. I wonder how new those are. And designing the molecules to do the matching and splicing must have taken a long time.
It's a lot like TikTok, right? It's a very simple concept: immediately produce customized video recommendations taking into account even the most recent interactions.
You just need a way to pack the TikToks into blank data centers.
(Note: blank data centers is a concept that kind of sorta makes sense. A blank cell doesn't make any sense at all)
DOJ are technically breakng the law by releasing a heavily moddified "reproduction" of the original files, not the "actual" files. The software they used "OmniPage CSDK 21.1" removes all usefull metadata and any encrypted files if any where stored.
I have a hybrid approach with GrapheneOS. 99% of the time I only use WiFi on my phone via a Tor router. I have an anonymous KeepGo ESIM with global data that does not expire and use it when I have to when Im away from home.
I started that way, though with AOSP I compiled myself. It was a nice nicotine patch but after a while my phone was so quiet and boring without proprietary social apps demanding my attention, I often found myself leaving it at home. Eventually I abandoned it entirely.
At least historically Apple would also have to run slower, while still costing much more than Windows. If a part gave you trouble you'd be forced to buy parts from the dealership and they'd sometimes tell you that you needed a new car when the same part on Windows could be repaired or replaced cheaply by any repair shop. You'd only be able to drive the Apple car on a handful of toll roads, although they were well paved while windows cars could be driven all over the place for free, even off-road if necessary, although that often resulted in flat tires making a triple A membership necessary and leading to a common misconception that apple was immune to flats.
I think the hate for Microsoft is more based on its popularity rather than Apple being "better". Both have dubious business practices.
Ads in the start menu? Apple constantly pushes iCloud and related subscriptions. Market abuse? Apple is well known to remake and then block competing apps from competitors. Stability? Everyone knows the spinning beachball of death but acts like it never happens. User unfriendly? Apple constanly modifies its hardware to hurt independent repair outlets.
I don't have that rosy 50's Chevy picture, it's more like a luxury coupe with a tighly locked hood. Sleek, desirable, you pay through the nose for every upgrade, and don't attempt to fix it yourself.
reply