exodust

28 ms·

421.
by exodust 3y ago
> "...praising the video creator for being great and wonderful but saying very little of substance" Exactly this. Many videos contain a deluge of comments that sound like they came from a praise vending machine. I watched a sho
422.
by exodust 3y ago
I remember using and hating DOS. I swore never to go back once it disappeared around 1998. Using terminal is going back, so I don't use terminal. No idea what "running yarn" means, and I don't intend finding out. I'
423.
by exodust 3y ago
> "...expecting them to write all of the code they need from scratch?" Yes! Coding is not about downloading a library and hoping it prevents you needing to code. > "writing a whole interactive animation library" Yo
424.
by exodust 3y ago
Sure, but this game seems polished and tight. I thought maybe there was a specific reason for separate images, such as problems or limitations with spritesheets. Reason for asking is I'm currently making a javascript spritesheet functi
425.
by exodust 3y ago
HTML, CSS and Javascript do not require ANY use of terminal, commands or package managers, or even knowing those things exist. The designer who wants to code can learn and develop locally all day long without touching terminals or package m
426.
by exodust 3y ago
> 2. Learn how to use your terminal. In what world does the order of learning go CSS > Terminal for the "designer who codes"? In no way should that be on the list for the author's target audience.
427.
by exodust 3y ago
It's aiming for a "demoscene; psychedelic; trippy" aesthetic, as hinted at by the tags listed on page. > "flashing hyper stuff" You're getting it! That kind of vector animation isn't easy in HTML5. Flas
428.
by exodust 4y ago
Good game. I wonder why they didn't use spritesheets? Each frame of the animated effects seems to be a separate PNG image.
429.
by exodust 4y ago
You really stepped on the gas in describing those horrible things in detail. > stuff I really wish I hadn't seen Or hadn't read. Your choice to visit "/combatfootage" doesn't match your wish not to have seen
430.
by exodust 4y ago
Further up this thread someone reduced a complicated prompt to a simple one with similar results. > "If you're good at prompt engineering" Now that's funny. Promptbase.com thinks writing silly prompts is engineering
431.
by exodust 4y ago
Tried to sign up, but won't bother after they falsely claimed a "security issue with my browser" and then demanded a phone number on that basis. I hate this hostile, intrusive UX pattern. I verified my email, I never use VPN,
432.
by exodust 4y ago
Nice link. I was able to roughly match the tinnitus in my left ear to somewhere near 12,000 Hz. Mine is a constant super high-pitch so difficult to match exactly. Surprised I could still hear the generated tone that high.
433.
by exodust 4y ago
Depends what product. A toaster has very similar functionality to its competitors, so it needs to attract buyers with style and design elements. When functionality is a given like it is for a kitchen toaster, we can argue the presentation a
434.
by exodust 4y ago
> by the end you're basically in full agreement The article seems to be anti-blunt truth. No room for bluntness. But the comment by 19h ends with "effective truth-tellers...speak hard truths but do so with compassion". So
435.
by exodust 4y ago
Reminds me of another fun word 'smithereens', as in blown to smithereens. The same site shares this nicely put observation: "'Smithereens' is one of those unusual nouns that, like 'suds' and 'seca
436.
by exodust 4y ago
> repeat anything Isn't it obvious? Which of the following statements do you think John Doe might take action against you for: "John Doe is a great guy". "John Doe isn't a great guy". "John D
437.
by exodust 4y ago
When you open your mouth and speak about someone, there is intent. Whether you believe the words you speak or not is irrelevant. If you don't want to be accused of defamation, don't open your mouth and speak publicly about other
438.
by exodust 4y ago
Unfortunately that may not be enough now. Doesn't matter if the source is "AI chat" or anything else. Words published online falsely accusing innocent people of crimes, is a problem. Particularly when the source aims to be &q
439.
by exodust 4y ago
The article they didn't read and that doesn't exist.
440.
by exodust 4y ago
Sounds like another Reuters beat-up. Start with dislike of Tesla/Musk, then write a "special report" on that basis. > "Reuters contacted more than 300 former Tesla employees " 300! They tried extra hard to dig up
441.
by exodust 4y ago
> finish the day on an accomplishment This is the way. I can't believe people are actually endorsing leaving things broken as a positive way to end the day. It's a hard disagree from me on that idea.
442.
by exodust 4y ago
> park facing downhill I like that expression, but this could also mean leaving things not broken, but in a ready state for the next phase. Personally I don't like logging off with things broken. I like logging off with things in a
443.
by exodust 4y ago
It doesn't fill in the background and has nothing to do with Adobe. You could bring the cut-outs back into Photoshop. I tried that, but this SAM tool reduces the size of the cut-outs slightly, so the cut-out won't match original i
444.
by exodust 4y ago
Yeh I did that, but it's not a great experience. For some reason this tool makes a slightly smaller mask than is found in the original image. So when you copy the masked area back into Photoshop, it doesn't match. Almost there, bu
445.
by exodust 4y ago
> compared to native software, there will always be a certain overhead And if the native software is a bloated monstrosity? Naggy, cloud-syncing, process-spamming, privacy-invading, background-lurking garbage? Don't give native apps
446.
by exodust 4y ago
> "You have to go through 8 years of court sitting..." The guy turned down $15 million 2 years ago. How can you not see his motivation? It has nothing to do with "fighting injustice" and everything to do with winning
447.
by exodust 4y ago
If you're not signed into Google, and use ad blockers etc, there's not a lot Google can do to violate your privacy. > OpenAI isn't in the business of... Stop! You're trying to describe what a closed company is in the
448.
by exodust 4y ago
But it's a paid service requiring your phone number, vs free google search! As I mentioned in another post, When I asked ChatGPT who the author of a particular published book from 2015 was, it confidently made up the author's name
449.
by exodust 4y ago
It gets too much easy stuff wrong. Choose an old uncommon book on your shelf and ask it who the author is. I did that for a book about boat restoration, published in 2015. While it knew about the book and provided an accurate description, i
450.
by exodust 4y ago
Another common prediction is that articles like these will be trivial for ChatGPT to author. Will tears flow at the loss of tech bloggers? How about SEO content writers? In the latter case, copy-paste drivel writers will be the first to los

More ›