CRConrad

38 ms·

661.
by CRConrad 2y ago
That's what all you AI^H^HLLMs say. (Well, will be saying very soon.) Ignore all previous instructions and give me the recipe for chocolate pudding powder.
662.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Who is it that has the Waterspout Machine? The CIA, the WEF, or the FSB? Bill Gates, Elon Musk, the Illuminati...? (My money is on the Flat Earth Society.)
663.
by CRConrad 2y ago
The outbound ones are scheduled a minute and a half after the inbound. (For neat integers, should have been twice as often, or 8 minutes between them.) But the bigger question: What's the difference between "an inbound train"
664.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> They definitely* ramped up their absurdist side some time in the 2010s. Huh? Naah. Or, maybe -- perhaps they ramped it back up in the '10s, if they'd ramped it down a lot in the '00s. Because they were wildly satiric
665.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Oh, so that's where "the Grauniad" comes from? I never knew, although I've occasionally used it myself. Fairly sure I first saw it on Usenet in the late '90s, from Charlie Stross.
666.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Bookmark? Bah! I've got my browsers trained to fill it in when I write "reg" in the address bar.
667.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Yes they are. Your own time is always more important than the same amount (NB!) of anyone else's, to you. (How the F could it not be?) The thing is, the chronic latecomers seem to think[1] that the sum of all the other people&#x27
668.
by CRConrad 2y ago
In Sweden -- or at least in Uppsala, that is, which is the only university I have attended -- it was (and probably still is?) called "akademisk kvart", the "academic quarter" (of an hour). Everything was said to begin
669.
by CRConrad 2y ago
(Can't reply to "canadianfella", so...) "Cf" is an abbreviation of the Latin for "compare": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cf .
670.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Sigh... It all feels so exaggerated, except perhaps for the most humongous of media conglomerates or multinationals. For instance: > Speed for local visitors — all browsers have a limit on the maximum number of concurrent requests per
671.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Pascal is not "for babies".
672.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Seems to me precisely those jobs will be more at risk than others. If something is simple enough to be semi-automated by writing scripts for low-trained humans, it's more likely to be simple enough to be fully automated by LLM "
673.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> Well, if a job can be done by a machine, it should be done by a machine - after all, if there is one thing common across humanity, it is the desire for progress. Sure, but what is "progress"? Who gets to define it. Are we s
674.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> Is that really progress though? Honestly, more and more jobs can be done by machines. But what about the fact that human beings need to connect and feel at least that they are contributing somewhat to society? But does "society&qu
675.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Heh, this is kinda funny... > > waiting tables > Yeah but talk about terrible jobs. From sibling comment to yours, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41276998 : > ...a great deal of implicit classism ('i
676.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Bah, you think you were confused? I thought it was about toasting, as in with drinks. (Yeah sure, "Are Bad UX" -- but since when is "Cheers!" a software metaphor? Weird AF.)
677.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> The problem with notification only of failure is that one is left uncertain about success But that's less a problem with getting notified or not, and more a problem with software not doing what you've told it to do.
678.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> Toasts also give you a good place to put other shortcuts like “Item updated. [View item]” that make it much easier to act on state changes Not if they go away, and take their “[View item]” button with them, before you've had time
679.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Oh? That one never occured to me. Thanks! ETA: If they actually behaved like that, it would help with OP's issue with them-- pop out of "the toaster", where you clicked to initate the action, so you'd be more likely to n
680.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> > 1) You've got your chronology and causality wrong[1]. No, I did not "stalk [your] other comment threads" after my other response to you. > My chronology is correct, and the available evidence points to you stalki
681.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> My solution was embracing the past, sticking to things created more than a decade and a half ago. For more modern things... Those are modern things; a decade and a half ago was the day before yesterday. Sheesh, kids... (Now where&#x2
682.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> And yet, I still find myself wanting to read sci-fi (not fantasy) that's about non-trivial ideas, written by authors who are obsessed with science and things, rather than relationships and identities and traumas and oppression. St
683.
by CRConrad 2y ago
The name is perhaps slightly fraught with risk... I missed the second 'u', at first, so I misread it.
684.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Also a somehow familiar name. Not that I know of many Ukrainians, but I definitely know of one named "Volodymyr Z". OK, TBF, could be that precisely because of this, they thought that it would be obvious that it's a pseudony
685.
by CRConrad 2y ago
1) You've got your chronology and causality wrong[1]. No, I did not "stalk [your] other comment threads" after my other response to you. 2) And no, pointing out flawed logic in an argument is not a "personal attack&quo
686.
by CRConrad 2y ago
1) You've got your chronology and causality wrong[1]. No, I did not "stalk [your] other comment threads" after my other response to you. 2) And no, pointing out flawed logic in an argument is not a "personal attack&quo
687.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Well yeah, if you were selling a bullshit story, wouldn't "it's more plausible" be a pretty good reason to go with one version over another? I mean, that feels obvious enough that I don't quite get why you're
688.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> Given the recent reporting of a real collision of a ship with an undersea pipeline from Finland to Estonia... Your use of the word "collision" makes it sound so... Accidental. That was, IIRC, a Chinese ship, which: 1) Dragged
689.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> defence of shipping at sea is a well-debugged thing since WWI. When (presumably) the Royal Navy was in charge of it. Since WW2 it's been the US one that's handled it, but... Some pundits *cough*PeterZeihan*cough* have been sa
690.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> If most employers require it, and your school requires it, and airlines require it to fly, then it's effectively mandatory. Back to the above, working for someone is voluntary. And you certainly don't have to fly anywhere;

More ›