5 ms·
There are comments saying they agree with the article, that it's like autocomplete - the opposite of what the article is arguing ("autocomplete is the wrong men
by fulafel 5y ago
There are comments saying they agree with the article, that it's like autocomplete - the opposite of what the article is arguing ("autocomplete is the wrong mental model")!
When I use autocomplete I know what I want it to complete. To mee also copilot seems like a different category.
- eat_veggies 5y agoSorry about that -- I think the article presents a correct analysis of conversational computing but kind of oversells the novelty of copilot, by missing the ways older tech like autocomplete are also conversational. So it's less a change in quality than a change in quantity (that said, a change in quantity can produce a change in quality -- see [1]). You might use autocomplete when you know what you want it to complete, but I also often find myself using it to look at the properties of an object, see what variables are in scope, "probe" the type of different variables, etc. -- all exploratory, all dialogues. [1] https://twitter.com/rsnous/status/1090858376471371776 https://twitter.com/rsnous/status/1090858376471371776
- emodendroket 5y agoI didn't mean to agree. I disagree with the article. As for the way you use autocomplete -- I would say it's not that uncommon for me to use autocomplete to "fish" for stuff when I'm not sure what I want. Especially if I'm working with something unfamiliar. I'll frequently just type the dot and then scroll through suggestions.