I wonder if it’s a bubble thing. People carry on and do what they always did, or just began thinking about what to do with LLMs. Big tech companies and startups may have to move fast and adapt, but I guess many other companies and organisations do not have to rush or fear immediate extinction, just because the wind blows in the other direction elsewhere in the world. I see that Hacker News and X are very "noisy" about LLMs (naturally), but that doesn’t mean the whole tech industry must react in the same way.
This is great news! I love CSS-Tricks and have bookmarked a lot of their articles over the years. We need reliable sources of learning material that isn’t just LLM-generated to make a quick buck. LLMs by their very nature cannot be trusted, even if they can be a great additional tool for learning.
Quality information is hard to come by these days and I admire everyone who take on the responsibility and cares enough to keep those sources available and healthy, even through uncertain times.
There is also the Wikimedia project Wikivoyage[1], which focusses exclusively on travel guides. I just recently learned about it but haven’t actually used it yet, so I don’t know if it is any good.
I enjoyed it, but for things like this, I would actually like to know what your genuine contribution was and what Claude did for you. It just makes me appreciate it more when I know that a human made the effort of investing their own creativity and thought into the writing or design.
So you’re saying your appreciation of a thing can only be attributed in retrospect after learning about how it was created and what human labors went into it and will be subjectively assigned based on your own personal beliefs around that contribution.
Seems a bit weird. To me, it’s enough that someone has a thought of something they wish existed and now it does exist. How they bring it into existence isn’t of much importance to me. The AI didn’t dream this into existence, but it may very well have performed 99.9% of the creative work, but the human provided the spark in the form of that instruction to do so. With nearly all creative works, I can appreciate the craft but also I don’t have to; I can just appreciate the output.
I merely said that it makes me appreciate it more, not that it is the only thing that makes me appreciate it (I actually read the whole thing and wrote that I enjoyed it).
Before generative AI, it would have been rare to see well designed things like this made by individuals and when I saw it, I would think that it is awesome that someone put so much effort and creativity into a hobby project. Even if it would not look professional I could have appreciated the expression of individuality.
Now when I see things that just look "too perfect" I cannot help but immediatly think "yeah whatever, it’s just AI" and if it happens to be real craftsmanship instead, I believe this would have been really sad, hence my comment. All I said was that I would like to know their contribution, not that this is all that matters to me.
Found Cosmic Osmo on there, one of my favourite games as a child. All black and white and very trippy, but so full of creativity, exploration and wonder. Also my gateway to the Myst series.
This is such a charming and human story about one of these whimsical things that I miss about software development these days. Sure, a few people might be annoyed by this, but for so many it would just bring a smile on their face amidst a dull working day. Too bad they didn’t get to implement him properly.
Maybe it is a work-in-progress and they just didn’t get around to doing all of them (it’s probably a lot of work). Most of the more complex/compound ones don’t have instructions or nets at all. The paper models are still very beautiful.
I would rather use something like “semblance” or “appearance”. All these terms require an inner experience which we cannot observe in LLMs, we can just see their semblance, like a shadow of the traces of an inner experience some human has left in the data that trained these algorithms.
You can’t, but you can make a reasonable guess that others like you will experience similar to you. We can even assume that (other) animals have inner experiences similar to us, since they are still biological organisms with a brain kind-of like ours. But an LLM is vastly different, so it makes sense to keep our assumptions in check and choose our words more carefully.
I don’t really mind the inconsistencies, it is just something fun and playful to discover and I believe the imperfections add to the charme of such things. It reminds me of the little sketches I made with Processing[1] years ago, when programming felt like just another artistic medium I could express myself in.
Maybe. But at least some (like me) will become more hesitant to buy newer products or update to the latest system (I am still on Sequoia because of all this crap lately). And we will also become more hesitant to recommend Apple products. If this is hurting them enough to stop is another question…
