nchmy

6 ms·

61.
by nchmy 2mo ago
The real revolution is Deepseek v4 flash and similar models (GPT 5.6 Luna, muse spark 1.2, mimo, etc...) - Genuinely good performance for a tiny fraction of the cost of Fable and even GLM etc... I think a lot of people would be very content
62.
by nchmy 2mo ago
eating seafood with lots of bones in it makes no sense to me, but is otherwise great. Tiling managers are full of bones, as far as I can see. But evidently lots of people are talented surgeons with it!
63.
by nchmy 2mo ago
Yeah, quite likely. It is surely for the best to stand up
64.
by nchmy 2mo ago
Ah! I was not aware that it was a transcription. Yes, I had the thought that it sounded a lot like speech. Thanks.
65.
by nchmy 2mo ago
Nice to see them putting up a fight. Though I assume this will cause pain for everyone. One note: aren't these sentences strange - like a series of half-thoughts? Especially the 2nd paragraph. > Our government understood, before man
66.
by nchmy 2mo ago
There's nothing wrong with the docs. It's the entire tiling experience, config, hotkeys etc that sounds hellish. I can't fathom why anyone would like it, but evidently many people do - great! I'm glad that there's v
67.
by nchmy 2mo ago
I just read the relevant Navigation doc and it sounds as hellish as i remember. I'm happy that folks are happy with it, but I'm sticking with traditional windows (in linux). https://omarchy.org/manual/navigati
68.
by nchmy 2mo ago
i havent used a claude model in a long time, but it seems quite clear to me that the chinese models have trained on claude (at the very least) - they write just the same
69.
by nchmy 2mo ago
I tried Omarchy 10 months ago. I liked how easy it all was, like the PWAs installed, etc... But I was completely lost with, and even offended by, how the tiling window manager worked. Windows were just moving around all over the place, chan
70.
by nchmy 2mo ago
I've been working with the chinese open models for 4 months. They are more than capable for a tiny fraction of the cost of the frontier ones. And yet they also continue to get significantly better and (Deepseek's recent price incr
71.
by nchmy 2mo ago
Indeed. Further, that neither human nor AI output is inherently good or bad. The crucial factor is whether a competent, thoughtful human has been involved in one way or another - to guide, review, steer, etc... Moreover, that a thoughtful h
72.
by nchmy 2mo ago
Again, youve missed the point entirely
73.
by nchmy 2mo ago
Indeed. And if someone then shares that output verbatim, they'll undermine their own credibility. They can guide the AI to tidy it up, or do it themselves. The issue is not in using AI for writing, but in not using it consciously.
74.
by nchmy 2mo ago
Agreed that AI's default voice is unproductive. But you can set/give instructions. And, yes, it would be foolish and inefficient to try to get Ai to write absolutely everything. But it can certainly be helpful in many ways. What i
75.
by nchmy 2mo ago
Surely we can all agree that banhammer people are generally not a good standard to go by? Still, if you value participating in that space, you have no choice but to follow their rules
76.
by nchmy 2mo ago
Not even slightly. The burden of proof is on you, given that I regularly have AI improve my writing
77.
by nchmy 2mo ago
Thanks for sharing a perfect example of something that any AI could have helped you improve
78.
by nchmy 2mo ago
> For me, the value of receiving comms from a human is different: it communicates not just the idea itself, but the fact that the human already understands the idea It doesn't say the (level of) understanding of the person, but th
79.
by nchmy 2mo ago
What? This entire thread and the OP and comment I originally replied to is people saying that Ai shouldn't be used for writing...
80.
by nchmy 2mo ago
Yeah, Ive had similar negative responses a few times to things that are obviously Ai assisted, but also obvious that human thought was guiding it. Frankly, it says more to me about that person than it does about me - they seem to be the sam
81.
by nchmy 2mo ago
We're on the same page
82.
by nchmy 2mo ago
No, you were claiming that no one has ever used Ai to help produce better writing. I was objecting to that, because it is an absurd statement. Ai could have told you that if you asked.
83.
by nchmy 2mo ago
> In some other context, sure, maybe some people are thoughtfully engaging with the AI, but I have never come across this yet. I suspect you haven't either. Um, I've literally said throughout this entire thread that I regularly
84.
by nchmy 2mo ago
It's sad that this has happened, but having knowledge/skill doesn't mean you have wisdom, integrity, discernment, etc... Those are an entirely different plane of understanding, and are what guard against our worst impulses an
85.
by nchmy 2mo ago
To be very clear, I NEVER advocated for copy pasting thoughtless LLM output anywhere. Literally quite the opposite.
86.
by nchmy 2mo ago
I agree. But this is a separate conversation, which (unfortunately) seems to be pointless at this point.
87.
by nchmy 2mo ago
Let's fire all editors, consultants, psychologists, sous chefs, grunts, etc!
88.
by nchmy 2mo ago
I don't think you quite realize the implications of what you're saying. Surely you don't actually believe, or even desire, for everyone to fully understand everything that they say... No room for questions, uncertainty, bewil
89.
by nchmy 2mo ago
Well, In any healthy organization or relationship, there should be no problem with someone not knowing about/understanding something. If someone is feigning competence, that's the fundamental problem, not AI
90.
by nchmy 2mo ago
Yes, so the issue here was not AI but a lack of competence, prudence, integrity, responsibility, discernment etc. It's the equivalent of vibe coding vs Ai assisted coding. Vibe writing vs AI assisted writing.

More ›