It definitely depends on rapport and how authentic someone is being. If someone asks me this and I know they genuinely care about me, I'd be happy to share. If there's less rapport, it will definitely feel like a person who can't read the room is trying some sort of social mind trick.
Yep. Grandfathering, deprecation. It's a new implementation of the same concepts.
And ditto for test coverage quality gates. I've seen that pattern used to get a frontend codebase from 5% coverage to >80%. It was just a cycle of Refactor -> Raise minimum coverage requirement -> Refactor again -> Ratchet again, with the coverage gate used to stop new work from bringing down the average.
RPG Maker XP (and later VX) were such a big part of my childhood! I never finished the game I was trying to make, but it is earliest I can remember being very deep into the creative process.
I completely agree with this. There's a certain confidence you get when you can hear a word you don't know, but can still comprehend it well enough to know what pinyin to type into your dictionary app. Mandarin Blueprint has a nice pinyin pronunciation video on YouTube that I worked through a while ago, and then followed with a few weeks of immersion in Taiwan, I was able to really pick out what people were saying.
I feel like listening is the key to speaking. You don't necessarily need to rote learn the tones for each word. You just need say words as you hear them spoken by others.
And for better or worse it feels like the errors are being "pushed down" into smaller, more subtle spaces.
I asked ChatGPT a question about a made up character in a made up work and it came back with "I don’t actually have a reliable answer for that". Perfect.
On the other hand, I can ask it about varnishing a piece of wood and it will give a lovely table with options, tradeoffs, and Good/Ok/Bad ratings for each option, except the ratings can be a little off the mark. Same thing when asking what thickness cable is required to carry 15A in AU electrical work. Depending on the journey and line of questioning, you would either get 2.5mm^2 or 4mm^2.
Not wrong enough to kill someone, but wrong enough that you're forced to use it as a research tool rather than a trusted expert/guru.
I’m not familiar with Australian (Austrian?) electrical code, but the correct size wire for circuits with 15A OCPDs in the US NEC is either #14 (2.5mm^2, rated for 60C) in a residential setting or #12 (4mm^2, rated for 75C) in a commercial setting [0]. If you can provide a link to the conductor ampacity table I can tell you if it matches.
[0] US code allows you to feed a motor on a 15A OCPD with #14s but everyone uses #12s in practice
I asked ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok and DeepSeek to tell me about a contemporary Scottish indie band that hasn’t had a lot of press coverage. ChatGPT, Gemini and Grok all gave good answers based on the small amount of press coverage they have had.
DeepSeek however hallucinated a completely fictional band from 30 years ago, right down to album names, a hard luck story about how they’d been shafted by the industry (and by whom), made up names of the members and even their supposed subsequent collaborations with contemporary pop artists.
I asked if it was telling the truth or making it up and it doubled down quite aggressively on claiming it was telling the truth. The whole thing was very detailed and convincing yet complete and utter bollocks.
I understand the difference in the cost/parameters etc. but it was miles behind the other 3, in fact it wasn’t just behind it was hurtling in the opposite direction, while being incredibly plausible.
This is by no means unique to DeepSeek, and that it happened with specifically DeepSeek seems to be luck of the draw for you (in this case it's entirely possible the band's limited press coverage was not in DeepSeek's training data). You can easily run into it from trying to use ChatGPT as a Google search too. A couple of weeks ago I posed the question "Do any esoteric programming languages with X and Y traits exist?" and it generated three fictional languages while asserting they were real. Further prompting led it to generate great detail about their various features and tradeoffs, as well as making up the people responsible for creating the language and other aspects of the fictional languages' history.
I basically just disable notifications for everything except apps that are useful and don't send promotional push notifications. It does mean that I need to "poll" for messages sent to my IG but if it's important I'll shift the conversation to another app.
I've always seen the main issue being people who "don't mind" or otherwise tolerate notifications because they're non-technical or don't realise how precious their attention is.
What are your top 5 apps that give you notifications? Seems strange to want less notifications but not know how to achieve this.
> Does suffering matter if death follows eventually? The dead cares about nothing, because it remembers nothing
Yes it matters. Causing suffering to a consciousness that can experience pain is inhumane.
Now, reasonable people can disagree how far to extend our circle of empathy. Some would exclude animals or even other humans (eg criminals or someone of a different ethnicity), while other people would go so far as to include ants, plants, or rocks. I think both extremes are wrong.
Perhaps more poignantly to you question, what if you ask yourself:
- does your answer change considering humans are also animals?
- regardless of target, what does it say to the character of a person who chooses to be cruel when they don’t have to
Reasonable people can also disagree as to the amount of pain and reasons for it.
If you have surgery that involves painful recovery, should the surgeon refuse to perform it? Only if it's elective? Or it's ok because you elect it? What about required surgery on a non-human animal? Is the painful recovery justified by the surgery's necessity [to achieve a human-desired goal]? What if it's necessary to extend the animal's life, or ameliorate other pain?
In the case of TFA the intervention is part of habitat management -- preserving the species in the face of human encroachment, or even just in the face of encroachment that occurred even if no further encroachment is allowed. That seems to me like a reasonable justification for the pain caused in that case, and this is also the case for cats and dogs even though the justification is slightly different there.
> In the case of TFA the intervention is part of habitat management -- preserving the species in the face of human encroachment, or even just in the face of encroachment that occurred even if no further encroachment is allowed. That seems to me like a reasonable justification for the pain caused in that case,
Agree. Similar story about elephants, who can wreck havoc on an ecosystem. Culling them is a good practice.
So it's not at all about the target of the suffering. It's all about the one(s) causing it. Which suggests to me that the suffering really doesn't matter, objectively speaking. And as such it also doesn't matter how far/near the circle is extended. It ultimately boils down to the others considering and judging any given situation, not the one(s) caused to suffer (to which applicability of definition is highly questionable in the first place if it includes plants and rocks).
Of course this changes greatly if the sufferer(s) survive the ordeal for a significant amount of time beyond, as there may be repercussions, depending on the degree of the effects caused and the capacity (physical, psychological, social, etc) of the sufferer(s).
I'm sure at some point it's cheaper to pay people to do nothing and have laws enforced, rather than indirectly paying people to do crime by letting stuff get stolen without consequences. Politically it sounds insane, but it would make for a more trusting society.
