LLMs have a very predictable and consistent approach to grammar, punctuation, style and general cadence which is easily identifiable when compared to human written content. It’s kind of a watermark but it’s one the creators are aware of and are seeking to remove. That means if you want to use LLMs as a writing aid of any sort and want it to read somewhat naturally, you’ll have to either get it to generate bullet points and expand on them yourself, or get it to generate the content then rewrite it word for word in a style you’d write it in.

Intel Arc also works surprisingly fine and consistently for ML if you use llama.cpp for LLMs or Automatic for stable diffusion, it’s definitely much closer to Nvidia in terms of usability than it is to AMD

Docker fan mindset

What OS doesn’t do that, even linux has xdg dirs

I just find the saving mechanism frustrating to use compared to vim’s as an entry level user, and now as a mid-skilled user I dislike how featureless nano is - when I was first learning how to use the terminal I hated having to edit anything as I was pretty much force-fed nano with no alternative provided, but on finding vim and remembering literally 3 things (:w, :q and i) everything became so much easier, but I definitely do have an extra bitter taste left about not being told about something much easier to use which irked me when I saw someone preaching how amazing nano is

I also really don’t get the hate for vim when remembering 3 things gives you as much/more functionality as nano and is a starting point for so much more functionality - intuitive doesn’t mean featureless and don’t try and pretend nano’s shortcuts are the same as 99% of other editors (text or otherwise), in fact they’re totally different, making it less intuitive

Nano is just as fiddly as vim and way less powerful when you actually figure out what you’re doing though?

Ie a completely redundant piece of software that has no place being pre-installed anywhere

That’s a human action anyway though… Not a “it’s been a while since you opened our app time to drag you back” notification

The syntax is certainly easier than Java

And VisualBasic’s syntax is easier than COBOL, but this isn’t a competition to make the least offensive heap of putrid garbage, so why does it matter?

Python works just fine for basic scripts, frankly it’s amazing for it, but oop and functional programming is so incredibly obviously badly shoehorned in that huge swathes needs scrapping and version 4 releasing

I mean once you get beyond bash-like scripts python is esoteric as fuck, adding oop to what is essentially a shell is a terrible idea

That said, there’s plenty of languages with good syntax that is still good when you get into more complex stuff (modern C#, scala, kotlin and more)

else { SneakilySecretlyCollectData(user) }

Yeah, gleam.io really fucked up I guess…

It’s milk chocolate (coated at least)… I’ve tried alternatives and frankly white, dark and flavoured vegan chocolates are good enough but there’s nothing close to or as good as milk chocolate so at this point it’s like saying “boycott steak because it’s not vegan”… It’s a fact, sure, but not a reason against it for people who aren’t already vegan, and vegans are already boycotting it away, so it’s a reason for nobody?

That said the fair cocoa point is very valid.

Unironically though people asking questions, then further explanation, then posting when they figure it out is pretty optimal compared to above average documentation

It’s not scrolling though - using the arrow keys on a keyboard or d-pad on a controller you’d use up to go up and down to go down when navigating documents, menus etc. As far as I’m aware unlike when you’re moving a viewport either by scrolling or in games there’s no debate when it comes to moving a caret.

And as you said, “having grown up in the tape era”. Just because it was logical for that application and so is logical to you doesn’t mean it’s still logical - people who grew up with record players could just as easily argue for two spinning knobs as you’re moving a potentiometer to increase/decrease the volume, and spinning the record forward/back; having grown up in the CD era I had both of them being up/down or left/right as the buttons were either beneath or either side of the slot/hatch most of the time, same with tv remotes having both as up/down, and given there was no standard then I don’t think either one “just makes sense”

Down is next because it’s a list of songs with the first song at the top and the last at the bottom.

Frankly it’s the orientation that makes the most sense when you consider it given most people will be listening from a streaming service, but back when CDs were a thing the songs weren’t considered a list but tracks numbered from 1 to n. The up button incremented the track number and so it made sense for up to be next.

Going even further to tapes, fast forward and rewind literally moved the tape left to right/right to left, and so it made sense for them to be right and left respectively, however now it makes less sense other than being what older people are used to

I drove this make of car for a while; there’s an optional head up display where the up and down buttons here let you cycle through contacts/the song queue/radio stations. I’d imagine it’s the same interface without it, just displayed somewhere in the car where you’re not looking while driving.

Having it so that up/down moves you up/down through the list when there’s a visual display is way more intuitive than up/down being volume - frankly the volume bar on Windows, Mac, many TVs etc. goes from left (quiet) to right (loud) anyway

Who’s suggesting that people are using if statements for arithmetic?

The only time that you can feasibly replace an if statement with arithmetic is if it’s a boolean, but frankly that’s an edge case… Also if you’re not writing in rust or c or whatever then don’t worry as the interpreter will run a huge amount of branches for every line of code (which is what all your nested ifs, switches, gotos, returns etc. will compile down to anyway)

Especially with swipe typing - the only times I find I’m typing in a whole word is if swipe typing repeatedly doesn’t get it (eg have when I’m trying to type gave), or when I’m typing a word that isn’t in the dictionary. That means the vast majority of the time autocorrect would kick in it would be unwelcome anyway

I mean OCaml… But the issue is more the monkeys bashing out the language wanting to A. set a type for their exported function and B. know what type whatever function they’re using is supposed to take so it doesn’t randomly break as they gave it some random type that was formerly compatible

Nah, it’s just a very generic address at a custom domain, so I imagine they just have scripts to email {enquiries, admin, info, help, etc.}@abc.xyz or something