maxverse

Same

Related discussions:

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48730904

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48691346

I feel like both the point you quote and your response are valid, and not mutually exclusive. It's great that you were able to avoid lifestyle creep and that $200K felt like a lot of money that "had a huge impact on my later financial condition, and enabled me to do many things". And I think Katrine (from the article) feels like that should be a lot of money. I don't see lifestyle creep playing a role in her life. Instead, another person they quote says:

[Ms. Gan]she saw the strain on friends who were earning below $200,000, for whom rent, utilities and groceries consume nearly everything that comes in.

I enjoyed playing with this. Wild how much it knows.

That resonates with me, too. I've tried building beautiful, does-one-thing well projects. I like the way you phrase it:

I try to be the best, in the list of “that specific feature” providers, not one of them, or one of the good ones.

What have you made, OP?

His agnostic leanings and heterosexual orientation align with a more liberal political stance.

That's a very safe guess

He is susceptible to confirmation bias, in-group bias, the availability heuristic and out-group homogeneity... he may also be prone to excessive phone use, binge-watching TV shows, and impulse buying.

That's literally everyone

Are you suggesting this was written by AI?

I use an M1 for personal development an an M4 for work. I'm a typical dev. I don't feel any difference.

I am genuinely curious what you're hoping to get out of your goal to use claude code daily!

Thank you for putting my feelings into words. "Really weird" is exactly how I feel. AI output in our work should be measured in engineering progress, not in use metrics, right?

100%. "Needs more attention to detail."

It's kind of crazy how nice people in multiplayer are. Nobody says anything about my mother or what kind of content I'm downloading to cause lag. Everyone's got the personality of, like, a chill dad now. People are more interested in a good game than just winning. It's really nice.

The other day, I was playing a noob game where one opponent on the other team was way better than the rest of us and rushed. His own team came down on him after.

The Gentleman is my go-to piano library to mess around! I have Noire and a few others, but have always loved its sound.

But also, yeah, NI is to music what... VS Code is to devs, right? Everyone uses/makes Kontakt libraries at some point.

Maybe I'm buying into the cool-aid, but I actually really liked the self-aware tone of this post.

Based on our benchmarks, we are uniquely good at catching bugs. However, if all company blogs are to be trusted, this is something we have in common with every other AI code review product. One just has to try a few, and pick the one that feels the best.

Today's agents are better than the median human code reviewer

"...at catching issues and enforcing standards, and they're only getting better".

I took this to mean what good code review is is subjective. But if you clearly define standards and patterns for your code, your linter/automated tools/ AI code reviewer will always catch more than humans.

Absolutely love this kind of project, combining different data sources to predict/model how you're doing. I also use chess as a proxy for my brain is working!

If anyone Googles it and is wondering about Feeling Good (1999) and Feeling Great (2020) by the same author, it seems like Feeling Great is just an updated version of the original book, based on more experience and new insights. Here's the author discussing the difference:

https://feelinggood.com/2020/10/26/213-from-feeling-good-to-...

It's crazy that it set off our alarms at the same time. One agreement -- oh, nice human. Two -- what is this!?

I love Addy's work, and enjoyed this article -- and I completely agree that it felt very LLM-y. I'm not sure what's scarier; that we know some of this didn't come from the author (and maybe that's okay?) or that one day soon, we'll get to a point where we won't be able to tell anymore.

This feels like a good second draft. There's definitely a message in here, but it shifts through the piece. To me, the most poignant sentence was " If I can just keep chugging forward, I will end up somewhere that is not here." I think the message is "Why are you working this hard? What do you hope to get out of participating in hustle culture; to what end?

So glad someone already spoke up about this -- I love Wired, and I think that piece is really poor (not because I love Ruby or think it's without fault, but because the argument it makes is essentially "it's not Ruby or Python, which have static typing tools.")

AI is helpful for this, but I also built https://www.hackterms.com eight years ago for this exact reason.

You're not alone!

What do you mean?

Saw your talk at the Recurse Center, and really appreciated it. I'm looking forward to reading this book!

Very cool! Looking forward to trying this out for my next invoice.

Who does your design? I absolutely love this aesthetic, both this product, and your site (chorus.sh). What is this even called? I went for a similar vibe with tinylogger.com, but def didn't have your skills to pull it off.

I read and enjoyed the post, but also found it a bit directionless. Yes, I think a lot of people agree that addictive social media is a problem. What's the solution?

The deeper issue is that we’ve outsourced our human connection to systems designed for profit. Real connection happens in the margins that can’t be monetized. The conversations that don’t generate data, the relationships that don’t scale, and the moments that can’t be optimized for engagement.

This sounds profound, but this is a problem that predates social media. People went to shows and music festivals to see art and connect with others - these are systems also designed for profit (and delivering art as their second thing.)

The problem is, as the author definitely knows, that running systems that enable connections costs money. The suggestion the author makes: "improve third spaces where people connect directly, authentically, without intermediation by systems designed to extract value from their attention", except someone has to pay for those third spaces, and people won't always want to visit them because we like dopamine, so we might go to the bar, or back on social media, or to video games or tv shows instead. A slow pace - boredom - breeds creativity and connection, but it's also boring, and it's hard to get people to stay with it (I might be projecting.)

The solution isn't another app. It's changing the rules of the game entirely.

On a different note, this closing feels very, very ChatGPT, and whether it is or isn't, the fact that AI tone is permeating our writing makes me really sad.

Def interested in the FE role - but heads up that your job board link seems broken!

Direct YouTube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2QWxT9a8HU