jj4211

joined 3 years ago
[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago

Heh, reminds me of an email thread. Someone stated a fairly straightforward, clear, and actionable course of action.

Then someone followed up with a GenAI email basically trying to be a sycophant to the person who wrote the plan and agreeing with them.

A VP did not get excited by the person that actually plainly declared what to do, but did announce that he was going to set up a meeting with the sycophant because he displayed so much insight, despite only repeating the first guy in a more confusing and buzzwordy way.

The AI generates corpo-speak in a very exciting way that further exacerbates an existing problem of promoting the wrong people.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

In my experience in a way it was better, because they had very low volume of output. Yes, pretty bad already but the GenaAI turned to their volume to 11.

This is one of the biggest downside, the worst people get the most volume out of it because they don't know or carevto curate the output.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

The problem in my experience isn't as much the work forcing it, it is the people who are very enthusiastic because they didn't know what to do and now they think the AI does it for them, but they still have bad ideas.

Think of the person who has this "great app idea" but just needs a developer to write it. Well now these messes are having GenAI churn out... something. They don't know if it works or not, but now all they need is someone to help finish off the "essentially done" work, or to accept the pull request the AI generated for your project.

Similar story for the creative content like videos and text. These people were limited by not having enough care to bother to learn or invest the time, but they thought they had amazing ideas. Now we see their uninspired slop bright to life in painful time killing form. The ones that might use it as just an accelerator but care about the output are drowned out by the "prompt and it's done" folks that just don't care.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Depends, are they biting their thumb at me? Might have to pull out my rapier.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

Ooooh... exotic

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 9 points 4 days ago

But to the extent you do buy, it is nice to know.

For example, even for an open hardware design, you need to buy parts.

But some things are either possible, but already nicely packaged by someone else (my opengarage I could have built, but it was well worth it to buy). A video doorbell I don't see good open designs for, so the "part" is the doorbell itself. A bed cooler has open designs, but they call on you to basically buy a donor commercial product to use for parts.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Ok, time for me to market my new eSpoon. It requires Internet and a subscription fee. It lets your health insurance company know your food intake and lets Google know your favorite foods.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 5 points 5 days ago

Another comment connected dots for me, and consistent with: 'No more walking on eggshells': Hegseth vows to lift guardrails on military hazing, harassment

This is the pro-hazing administration, and maybe animal raping is part of some of their 'good old boy' hazing?

Obviously not sure, but it's at least a theory that has some rationale that otherwise seems impossibly pointless to change.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago

I was sitting here wondering why there would be such a wide spread issue such that they would move to change the rules instead of just covering up some isolated incident.

I didn't think of hazing as a possibility, but that totally tracks and just reiterates how totally screwed up their candidate pool is...

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

With Linux? Kernel signed with your own key to get out of lockdown mode restrictions?

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

Not everyone's school time was shitty.

Especially those of us who had school before "A Nation at Risk" incited changes in education.

Reagan's department of education concluded that falling scores meant kids were slacking and needed to be pushed harder on standardized testing. The result was culling of recess, gym, arts, and things like home economics/shop class. To make more room to hammer in "important" stuff. So the experience became razor focused on some of the most soul crushing material without much reprieve. Note that there's a thought that making people take the tests they didn't used to take caused scores to go down, rather than some soft laziness of the system, so we might have 'fixed' the wrong things.

Then COVID happened and schools dramatically cut back on social events and interactions. Even as the critical threat of COVID subsided, I think administration found it easier to manage the students this way, so students did not access to lockers back (because that would encourage congregation in hallways) and on top of everything else, they have to lug all their school stuff around. Somewhat a mixed bag as most of the 'textbook's are digital now, but still have a few big ones.

For me, school had carved out time to socialize pretty freely, to be vaguely active in a gym class, to just do some woodworking stuff, to do some cooking and sewing. Recess until like 13 years old. Current kids stop getting recess about 10 or so and unless they join a sports team likely never see physical activity from school again, and while there are still electives, much more rare. I don't think I even saw an option for a 'home ec' class in my kid's elective options, everything seemed to be more 'substantial' than those sorts of classes I had growing up.

view more: next ›