That example flowed well and didn't stand out to me.

But what happens when you no longer feel that you have a decent chance of being able to determine that something might have been created with LLM assistance? Do you not mind because you can't tell anyway, or do you refuse to read anything at all for fear of potentially consuming some LLM assisted work?

I'm fine with it as long as it's not full of the usual signals, because that's just bad writing that I don't enjoy.

I had exactly the same thought yesterday. For now the "its not Y, its X" idiom is a strong LLM marker. It should be fairly simple for the brain trust at the labs to get rid of it, and I'm sure they eventually will when prose writers becomes a relevant enough customer base.

It already is very hard to identify AI text, and we probably consume a lot of it unbeknownst to ourselves. Its like microplastics now -- you can find it everywhere (or so the propaganda goes).

I don't have a solution for when they fix that stupid idiom. I'm already reading less current things in general because of this, and might just do more of that. Even if its impossible to distinguish, I think people will pro-actively mark their stuff as LLM-free. There isn't a tech to support/prove that rn, but there might be in the future.

Chasing a bird of lesser intelligence so that it slams into an office building window seems especially cruel.

Birds chase coyotes so they slam into the sides of cliff walls, sometimes even painting a fake tunnel to fool the coyote.

I believe that canonically the tunnel painting is made by the coyote, the problem is that because it's a cartoon the bird can run into the non-existent tunnel anyway and the coyote cannot because that's funnier.

It is interesting that e.g. "Coyote time" was copied into platform games but in real life if you're not stood on solid ground you fall immediately 'cos Mother Nature doesn't give a shit what's more fun.

Mother Nature isn't in charge of gravity. That's Papa Physics' job.

>Birds chase coyotes

Does the bird ever even acknowledges the coyote?

It does beep at it.

How is it so different from, I don't know, directly grabbing it and tearing it apart? There are only so many ways they have to kill something (or injure it enough to allow killing it).

It definitely seems brutal, but when I stop and think about it it's actually probably more humane for the prey than getting eaten alive, right?

A lot of crow hunting stories feel cruel to read about, though I wonder why that is.

There is something about intelligence that seems to carry a degree of... moral responsibility, somehow? Though in reality it's just an animal eating another animal, as ever.

Maybe something like this: Most animals hunt in a way that minimizes their odds of getting hurt, to the best of their ability. Crows are pretty smart, and not very strong in the grand scheme of things. So they engage in tactics that look like cruel manipulative pranks; causing the prey to somehow kill itself or get killed by something stronger.

In the end, I think a gazelle doesn’t look up at the lion that killed it by outrunning it and the snapping its neck and say “Ah well, got me fair and square!”

> a gazelle doesn’t look up at the lion that killed it by outrunning it and the snapping its neck

I know this is tangential to your point, but lions don't really hunt that way. They ambush, as they could never outrun a gazelle, and then they don't snap its neck unless unintentionally. They tend to just start eating it while it is still alive. It's quite brutal to watch.

Humans used to hunt animals by chasing them into pits and then punching holes into them with sticks until they bled out not to mention the many kinds of horrible traps for smaller prey animals.

Humane hunting is mostly something that only a rich old guy with his night vision goggles and sniper rifle can afford.

Even for farm animals, many cultures perform their sacrifice in ghastly ways.

I didn't have a slightly panicked moment, but sometime in the last year my approach to programming changed.

When starting a project, I used to think about how I was going to structure it, how the large pieces would interact, how some of the details would work out, and then I'd work through alternatives and consequences on my own.

Now I don't think about it on my own so much as have a conversation with an LLM about it. And it's great because it can quickly gather information from various sources, I can ask it for links to canonical sources, I can ask it about trade-offs between alternatives that I might not have considered, and through conversation, I end up with a more detailed analysis.

Then as I work through the development, I keep my new agent partner in the loop for discussion, suggestions, and troubleshooting. It can't be trusted completely, but it's certainly reliable enough to be considered a useful tool for my purposes.

I went from thinking it was an interesting toy to play around with, to completely integrating it into my work flow, and that change seems to have happened very quickly.

That is leveraged speculation on a future listing before real float, real index flows, or real public market ownership exist. With a 20% premium that is evidence that the hype machine is working, and the best evidence of engineered retail FOMO.

> evidence that the hype machine is working...

Which is exactly the kind of thing that can stave off disaster for years. Just look at TSLA market cap.

Human created music might have value to them, but it doesn't mean that the AI song was valueless. They admit they enjoyed it. So it doesn't make sense in terms of it not having value.

I wouldn't say it's asinine though. People reject creative output out of personal protest against the creator. Someone might love a movie only to refuse to ever watch it again because they found out the director was accused of something horrible.

Some people just don't want to support anything to do with AI. Although in this case the OP admits to also using AI directly so there's some inconsistency there, which is consistent with the state of confusion and uncertainty OP is expressing.

True, asinine was too strong a critique. I am just not in favor of emotional decision making where it can be helped. I can despise Tom Cruise as a person while still enjoying many of his movies. I know that some can't do that. I have always detached the creators from the art and that makes AI slot right in for me.

It's not emotional when there is still always a person behind these "works" that stands top benefit from it from you listening to it.

Why would you be adamantly against solar? That sounds like someone who is of the opinion that solar is NEVER a good idea. Nonsense.

I’ve talked to some local people who are convinced that panels slowly leach heavy metals into the surrounding ground.

They mainly argue against it on residential & farm land (Midwest USA) for this reason.

The argument I've seen against it for prime farm land in the UK is "Well we could use it to farm things" but that maybe lands less well in the US because of the enormous scales involved. "¿Por qué no los dos?" is the obvious retort in a huge region like that.

I've never seen "heavy metals" conspiracies, though I'm sure if I just wait I'll run into some because people sure do like making up reasons good things are bad...

Fox News is funded by fossil. They literally ship a 24x7 feed of why fossil is good and renewables are bad. It is their business model: money for placed content to shape opinions.

So someone watching that has strong opinions about renewables that is hard to overcome.

And TSLA isn't worth it's current market cap of 1.47 trillion dollars either. Hasn't been of any consequence for years.

I get your point, but prayer can be akin visualization and practiced focus, which can indeed have an effect on one's life.

Then there's the type of prayer where you straight up beg for things from FSM for five seconds and move on with your day. Probably less helpful, that.

i'm OK with meditation, as it doesn't require believing in superatural, all powerful beings

Perfect.

I originally read this as more than 200%.

The price raise doesn't seem terrible in this market. Affordability of most goods is pretty bad right now.