scubbo

I was amused and irritated in equal measure when a senior manager at $LAST_JOB demanded that documents include "no jargon", then went on to use many terms like those you've listed here with no indication of awareness of the contradiction.

Just like the famous observation that "anyone driving slower than me is an idiot, and anyone driving faster than me is a maniac" - "jargon" is just any term-of-art that you're not currently familiar with. Attempting to communicate like Up Goer Five is inefficient. The solution is not to ban jargon - it's to:

* Cultivate a glossary for any terms that were introduced _within_ the domain/company, which are not in common usage outside

* Normalize a culture that does not shame asking what something means

TIL the word (ROT13 for spoilers) "fgbcvat" :)

I'd seen the articles making claims about LLM-idiom being unconsciously imitated by humans, and reassured myself that _I_ couldn't possible be so impressionable.

Then during a presentation I was making today, a coworker wrote in chat "If <scubbo> says 'You're absolutely right' one more time, I'm checking his house to see if we're actually talking to an agent".

They got me.

TIL the term "streetlifting"

In such a situation, I'd really hope that I have my handy copy of https://www.howtoinventeverything.com/ available!

I guess I'll check back later and try to remember that I can't have the tab open in the background? :)

EDIT: OK, I found the previous puzzles link. Cute! Though I got a bug on the second one - (ROT13 for spoilers) apparently the answer was "tenavgr" but I put in "grnevat" and it still accepted it (but other prompts had not accepted alternate-but-valid words)

Yes. We only need one AI company. Max two. Good idea.

Nothing in the original comment suggested that fewer AI companies was inherently a good thing - just that this _particular_ AI company is a bad one.

Deciding who is more moral has a great history.

I think you're being sarcastic, but, uhhh...are you honestly advocating for the converse, of making no judgements based on morals?

I was always under the impression that that was referencing the notion from spycraft.

Even if they're saying something bad about it?

Conductor is a more fully-featured app rather than a TUI (some people might prefer one or the other), and is Mac-only.

steady stream of promotions until they cap out at L5

Am I missing a joke? L5 is just a single promotion away from hiring-out-of-college, at least for the FAANG that I was at.

https://vercel.com/blog/how-conductor-moved-parallel-coding-...

Tried this for a couple days, but conductor.build is way better IME. Running _in_ the terminal is a flex, but doesn't actually bring any advantage.

o7

God, I loathee the use of "moreso" as a synonym for "more" (rather than as "having the previously-mentioned property to a greater degree"). I'm convinced it's a hypercorrection by people who want to sound educated without actually thinking about the meaning of the words they use.

https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/211458/more-so-o...

Indeed. "Lethargic" meaning "affected by lethargy" would hardly be difficult to guess!

Can you elaborate? Who are the imagined "they", and in what way are they conducting experiments with or monetizing this investigation?

Open AI claims

You undermine your own point when you misrepresent the situation like this. Real human mathematicians, including at least one Fields Medal winner, have validated and complimented the result.

Definitely not a 100% case.

I mean...they _are_. That doesn't mean that they doesn't have quality beyond what those dregs see.

FWIW, I didn't read this as AI-like. Even on a re-read, it's only the quasi-em-dash, and _maybe_ the polite acknowledgement of "Very fair pushback" (just good etiquette, IMO!) that would ring any alarm bells. You're fine.

Higher taxes for anyone earning over $100k

Not a failure. Society working as intended.

[...] lower quality of life [...]

Agreed, that would be a failure, if it were to happen. How on earth could "giving people money" lead to a lower quality of life for them?

Politicians and corporations earn billions in profits on UBI distribution fees

As opposed to the much higher fees accrued by the more-complex means-tested programs today?

A deeply repugnant man, carrying out painfully-obvious sleight-of-hand to obfuscate the clear gaps in a cancerous philosophy. I'm pleasantly surprised to see the comments being so critical.

OK, I'll bite - what would a failure of UBI look like?

Thank you

The amount of computations for a human to do the same tasks is thousands of orders of magnitudes less.

OK then - do it, faster.

You can take comfort in the fact that a few months later some[...] developer can [solve] the same problem [using your work]

Isn't that what collaboration and sharing software is supposed to be all about?

SSND?

Y Combinator is right there in the URL

Most people aren't so slavishly devoted to capital that they have memorized the names of firms.

I like the presentation I heard from a Principal, that AI tools amplify your competence. If you start out incompetent, it'll just allow you to be incompetent with greater scope and (negative) impact.

But you can't talk to them about the flow of the code. You can't ask them for their thinking as to why certain things are.

There are plenty of valid criticisms or warnings about over-reliance on AI coding, but this is not one of them. Today, I am using a semi-autonomous agentic coding system which has an `interview` functionality built in - when it spits out the PR from the input, if you have questions about the motivation or context for a particular choice, you can start up a clone of the original agent in a sandbox to question it.

Now, you might claim that those responses aren't always reliable, accurate, or consistent, and that claim has a little more weight (though, in my experience, decreasingly so) - but it is _certainly_ not the case that you cannot interview an agent about choices made. I'm literally doing it every day.