davidmurdoch

I can do the music part just fine. But listening to two conversations at the same time just means I understand neither of them.

This is not sly.

MFWO has lockscreen logging too, right?

Why not complain?

Because we add humans enjoy variety. I read for entertainment, even technical posts like this one that I have no use for. I often trying to think about what the author may have been thinking when writing, why they introduced concepts in a specific order, what ideas might they have omitted, etc. It's personal and enjoyable. But now, when I detect the familiar writing style of what seems to be a gpt 5 model, that "parasocial" connection dies.

The LLM explained the core concept and features very well. But it was dull and boring to me, as I already have to read this writing style at work pretty much all day every day.

Don't change. The homogenous way LLMs write is just tiresome and boring, like if every movie stared Ryan Reynolds - an actor famous for having no range. Ryan Reynolds is enjoyable to watch on occasion, but I don't want everything I watch to be Ryan Reynolds.

Ah, bummer. Not totally surprising though.

I was riffing off of the meaning from https://noslopgrenade.com/ which made its way around the comments here on HN a few weeks ago.

You think I'm using AI to leave comments like this on HN?

They could just feed an llm a small corpus of past human authored posts from their site, and have the LLM rewrite it in a style matching style, and it would likely turn out pretty great.

The feature is great. The post itself is a slop grenade.

I don't think "incapable of saying yes" is a thing.

Another great Life Pro Tip is "Never accept 'no' from someone who can't say 'yes'."

searching my spreadsheet

What does this mean?

This isn't a fair comparison. Wasm was severely limited when it was first implemented and it had the advantage of a decade of improvements. Asm.js has had zero improvements in that same time frame.

Had WASM not been adopted we would have SIMD in JS ( probably via asm.js) by now. Because we didn't, JS just cannot compete with WASM in many computationally heavy workflows. We'd also have general purpose JS to Asm.js compilation, with few API restrictions, making writing it much easier.

I always enjoy to find people who think so drastically differently than myself. This sounds like an absolute nightmare to me and I would gauge my eyes out.

That's what perception is.

No, it isn't. Perception is a process, and ingress only a part of the process.

Perception (from Latin perceptio 'gathering, receiving') is the organization, identification, and interpretation of sensory information, in order to represent and understand the presented information or environment.[2] All perception involves signals that go through the nervous system, which in turn result from physical or chemical stimulation of the sensory system.[3] Vision involves light striking the retina of the eye; smell is mediated by odor molecules; and hearing involves pressure waves.

Perception is not only the passive receipt of these signals, but it is also shaped by the recipient's learning, memory, expectation, and attention.[4][5] Sensory input is a process that transforms this low-level information to higher-level information (e.g., extracts shapes for object recognition).[5] The following process connects a person's concepts and expectations (or knowledge) with restorative and selective mechanisms, such as attention, that influence perception.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perception

No they can't. There is no evidence at all of better color differentiation

Yes, there is. Example: "Russian blues reveal effects of language on color discrimination." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17470790/

Knowing the names of notes doesn't make it any easier to tell if a note is out of tune.

I didn't say that. But having a deep familiarity with tones does.

Musicians learn.

Yes, I know. I majored in Music and have 30 years experience.

they spend tremendous amounts of time listening to sound and being corrected

I'm confused since you seems to have just switched sides of the argument completely and entirely here. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are thinking that _having_ knowledge (knowing the words and vocabulary) is what I meant. But that is not what I meant. I meant to speak about the _understanding_ you have when you intimately familiar and experienced.

The difference between cyan and azure exists even if you don't have the vocabulary to communicate that difference to someone else.

Those colors are pretty different and aren't that interesting to study, from a linguistic relativity point of view. Colors much closer together, like #187af7, #1b85f5 and #187af7 are.

Your cone cells do not perceive anything whatsoever. Your brain does that part. Those who grew up with words (meaning) assigned to subtle variations in colors can tell those colors apart without a reference to compare it to better than, and much faster than those who haven't grown up with learning the distinction.

We know this to be obvious of sounds, musicians who can tell if a note is slightly out of tune when others who haven't learned how can't, or taste/smell: wine connoisseurs who can tell very similar wines apart that all taste the same to me.

You're not thinking in photons. Your brain is making up meaning from the stimulation your eye received from photons. The perceiving part is learned.

I don't think so. Just becoming fluent in multiple languages can result in the perception of more distinct colors. And those fluent in languages that have additional distinct color names can differentiate subtle differences in the shades of colors that non-speakers cannot even differentiate. Color is less about seeing what is actually out there and more about how our brain interprets colors to create "meaning".

For sure. 1000%. Anyone disagreeing with this has lost their marbles.

For those that have lost their marbles: sure, people use words incorrectly, but that does mean we all have to use those words incorrectly.

In compute vernacular, "edge" means it's distributed in a way that the compute is close to the user (the "user" here is the device, not a person); "on device" means the compute is on the device. They do not mean the same thing.

All apps that don't have a tangible component, legal protection (like music, tv, movies), or a personality behind it will trend towards $0.

"Good luck, have fun, don't die."

Yes. And if you can get it to 102F your body will produce heat shock proteins. Which are good for a whole bunch of reasons, but also can be very bad if you have any tumors, as it makes damaged cells more resistant to apoptosis.

You would need to use use_dynamic_url: true in the manifest to create a unique one.

It's a joke because Jira is so horrible

Still better than jira.

You don't know what plausible means.

Witnesses and an education ministry official said that the school was located on a compound that was a base for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps until about 15 years ago.

https://www.nbcnews.com/world/iran/iran-school-strike-us-mil...

In this case it seems plausible that the military would have an outdated database, and that an LLM would have "known" it wasn't a base anymore, assuming the LLM was trained on documents/maps with this up to date information.

Incorrect and not even close.

Greenfield is easy because nothing matters yet.

No legacy data. No backwards compatibility. No users depending on uptime. If the architecture is wrong you just rewrite it, rename a few services, and move on.

Maintaining and expanding a real system means every change has consequences. You’re migrating live data, preserving behavior people rely on, and evolving the architecture while the plane is already in the air.

0→1 lets you be bold because you can break things. 1→10M is harder because you can’t.

(I'm just kidding, your dismissal just needed a dismissal to make things balanced again)

Why do you think that? I'm looking at getting one.