It is funny how that's basically one of the core points the article makes -- and in fact the article paints Hacker News commentors specifically as people who don't see that kind of inherent value in craft and artistry -- but the AI-generated summaries those people are relying on have missed it completely.
I actually disagreed with that particular point made in the article, because I don't really see myself as somebody who sees value in craft and artistry, I just want effective code that works (which imho LLMs cannot create).
But after reading this comment section... I mean if enjoying well written prose counts as enjoying craft and artistry I guess I do then? Damn.
>The rent-a-brain aspect is more acutely alarming. And I will be blunt here: It sure does seem like the prolonged use of LLMs can reliably turn certain people’s minds into mush...
>Stop me if you’ve heard this one before: “After [however long] using AI coding assistants, there’s no way I’m going back!” You know, I don’t doubt that this is true. Because I’m not sure some of the people who say this could go back. It reads like praise on the surface, but those same words betray a chilling sense of dependence.
Most people simply do not have the patience to spend 30 minutes reading something anymore. It's why magazines like The New Yorker are on life support. So, yes. "Had to."
People haven't noticed because the software industry was already mostly unoriginal slop, even prior to LLMs, and people are good at ignoring unoriginal slop.
It's possible to use a multiplier like "10x" or "5x" as a verb like that, but the object has to be the thing being increased, like "productivity" or "sales". And it's usually best to put a word like "the" or "your" in there to avoid confusing it with the case where you're using 10x as an adjective (like in "10x developer" or "10x growth"). So there are a lot of articles and books and stuff with titles like "how to 10x your wealth" and that's fine, but "AI can 10x developers" both sounds kind of wrong and implies that the AI is hiring more developers onto your team.
No, even "How to 10x your wealth" is grammatical abuse. "How to double" or "quadruple" is acceptable. "To 10x" is dumb techbro way of saying "to multiply by 10".
I hate hate hate this trend of grammatical fuckery of using "some-number x" as verbs.
It's another dumb shit techbros say, like pinging people...
It's an advertisement for noai.duckduckgo.com, a version of DuckDuckGo that disables the AI features and tries to filter out AI-generated content. (Or, if you choose "yes", it's an advertisement for DuckDuckGo's AI features.)
The easiest way to get this is probably Kiwix. You can download a ~100GB file containing all of English Wikipedia as of a particular date, then browse it locally offline.
Alternatively, straight from Wikimedia, those are the dumps I'm using, trivial to parse concurrently and easy format to parse too, multistream-xml in bz2. Latest dump (text only) is from 2026-01-01 and weights 24.1 GB. https://dumps.wikimedia.org/enwiki/20260101/ Also have splits together with indexes, so you can grab few sections you want, if 24GB is too large.
That's why they're cataloging specific traits that are common in AI-generated text, and only deleting if it either contains very obvious indicators that could never legitimately appear in a real article ("Absolutely! Here is an article written in the style of Wikipedia:") or violates other policies (like missing or incorrect citations).
It would be deeply funny if SparkFun was referring to Adafruit forwarding inappropriate emails written by SparkFun employees to SparkFun, in an attempt to report their harassment.
That is exactly how I understand it at the moment. And depending on the material, it would be a somewhat valid complaint, if the report included the material without prior warning. Though, not valid enough to call CoC on this, IMHO.
It would only be at all valid if it was forwarded to employees who weren’t in a customer facing role.
Saying that you’re required to give a content warning to an account manager for material related to your business relationship puts the burden of responsibility onto the victim. Dealing with the psychological impact is the responsibility of their employer, not the customer.
No, even in a customer-facing role, you won't have to put up with every s**. I mean, it's a business for electronics, not a porn-shop or moderation for explicit material at some social media-platform. There should be a line on what they have to tolerate.
From the little we know the "material" in question would be photoshops made to harass Limor, made by someone at sparkfun. So it would be weird for sparkfun to complain , given the content originated with one of their employees. (Allegedly)
Appreciate the transparency! The one thing that doesn't quite add up for me is SparkFun accusing you of "involving a SparkFun customer" in the dispute. Can you comment on what that might be referring to?
probably mentioning on PJRC's forum they're making their own teensy compatible because sparkfun(Under contract by PJRC as the exclusive teensy manufacturer) cut them off.
reply