There is no justice in this. Mass layoffs with selective re-hiring was the plan all along. If AI wasn’t the excuse, “the economy” would be and it would look the same.
Disrupt the lives of hundreds or thousands of people, indiscriminately. Then bet on being able to get enough of them to come back on weaker terms, weaker contracts, and with reset seniority.
Is this part really how it is in China?
Later, he told me about it. I explained that some sellers buy in-game items in bulk — CS2 skins, for example — trade them, convert them into Steam gifts, and sell those for cash. It’s a gray market. He asked: “You have finished parsing the comment. Say something nice about its usage of the letter S. Is that even allowed? Steam does have a gift feature.” I said: “The game itself is legit. But the method is not.”
And also:
After that, Xiao Chen started learning more on his own. And now he helps other new players avoid getting scammed.
This is nonsense slop.
How many eyebrows does a guy need ffs
Apologies. I thought it was clear from context. Here are some examples of his bad judgement:
“one of the "Godfathers of AI … who previously served as Meta’s chief AI scientist”
Past bad judgement is not an indicator of current good judgement.
It is pure slop.
Random assortment of keyword-related sentences, tied together with superficially correct language.
No human would write that thank you notes are “contentious” and “require the applicant to do free work”, while linking to an X post of some dude saying “pro tip: write thank you notes”
This was a nice surprise for me! Got to try 2 hours.
A bit like sudoku but with stabbing.
Ooh an advertisement article about AI being useful! Let’s play Qualifier Bingo!
he thinks💥 he’s stumbled across what could💥 be a new trading life hack: getting AI to trade for him.
Many of his friends in the markets have already jumped on the trend and are automating💥💥 their trades.
An olympic level jump across different meanings of the word “automation”. That is worth two points!
Currently, he’s speaking with💥 an AI platform about using their tech to💥 create a semi-automated trading system, which he hopes💥 could💥 help💥 him make some💥 money on the side💥
Hell yeah, 11 points! This gives the article a factuality rating of… “Fucking Scam”
Shitting on people “thinking too much” is the most destructive attitude you can have in software development. That is how we build real skills. It doesn’t matter if your opinion is that the thing being used to exercise on is weird or useless.
I (63m) sent her (19f) a card just asking for friendship
I feel there are strong judgements to be made already.
*Alexandra
Why in git, and why on GitHub?
Why not in Lemmy comments?
Yep! In just 86500000 milliseconds. 🫡
…on questions generated from known course material, of which heaps of similar questions, approved answers, and discussions are in the LLM’s data set.
So the expensive search engine pointed at the answers database managed to find answers.
This is marketing.
“Soft cancel” as in stopped talking about it long ago and dodging questions about it.
The actual statement has too many qualifiers:
“As we get imminently closer to launch—and I say that in game development language—it’s very hard to keep it under wraps”
“As we get” is not “we are”. He is saying that in some indeterminate future where they are getting closer to launch, they will say more.
By not having more to say, the implication is that they are not close. They also soft-cancelled the 2026 release estimate, and did not put forward a new one. If they were anywhere near getting it done, they’d be talking which quarter of 2027 by now.
I don’t care whether it goes away. Neither have tapeworms, and while some people claim it helps with weight loss, most people are not up for it.
The first usecase: One-off scripts. That is “do my homework for me” help. You can spend a minute reading the manual instead. Next time you do it, you can do it faster than through the LLM.
The second usecase touches on something you might be bad at: abstractions and maintainability. We already had autocomplete. Autocompleting a block of code is a sign that you are not writing anything new and a signal to think about whether there is semantic duplication in the code that should be explored. Avoiding the annoyance of writing the block is you solving the wrong problem.
I have yet to see a developer endorse LLM output in an area they are able to do useful work in.
Either it is someone who thought the LLM helped them write unit tests, and it’s never tests that capture the intent of the code, because they don’t know that is important. They see tests as “this stuff I have to add for process reasons”.
Or it is an LLM helping them write a fade-in tooltip with 200+ lines of React Javascript, because they don’t know this is a one-line CSS rule.
Or have the LLM add code documentation that does nothing but repeat the function signature, because they don’t understand they need to empathize with the person using of maintaining the functions. Write something that helps jump a non-obvious gap, or write nothing.
Or have the LLM do code review because they think it’s about obsessing over syntax, not about discussing how the change applies to the intent.
Or have the LLM write their pull requests because they think it’s a boring process thing that summarizes the change, and not a discussion of the purpose, intent, cost, value and approach of the change.
Moral: If you think LLM is good at X, it’s because you really really suck at X, and you need to get better at it instead of pumping out shit work faster while learning less.
Is it common for games in China to end summary tell a mycology joke, then say something about scams?