Good riddance! His neurotic public harassment of anyone who is remotely aligned against him (cf. Tumblr moderation and AspirePress) is simply childish and leaves much to be desired.

His behaviour has shown him to be unfit to be a CEO.

I’ll bet breaking RSA-1024 at this rate

Mate, it’s a style thing that depends on which style guide you’re following

AP recommends spaces around them, whereas Chicago doesn’t

besides if we’re critiquing incorrect following of English orthography

—Sentences should be capitalized

—The word “don’t” requires an apostrophe

—End sentences with a period

—That’s incorrect usage of an em-dash at the end there — but what does it matter anyways ;)

One can only hope the government has some klaxons stashed away.

Side note: isn’t it crazy how Seoul is so close to the border that you can see North Korea on a clear sunny day? And the aforementioned traditional artillery-ableness of it all because of that?

As a person with an eye not especially trained for typography, these two typefaces appear too remarkably similar to be quarreled over. I’m sure those with stronger type setting preferences would disagree, but I find it funny how much humans can debate over things that appear minute and mundane to others (cf. https://xkcd.com/915/)

The thing is, the subtle distinctions do seem to matter in terms of reader acceptance and comprehension, at least in my experience of setting type.

Like most things, it's a gradient/continuum, and achieving true excellence is the result of iterating and testing until all decisions/selections are correct.

The funny thing is that the reason for me posting the long bet was looking through previous posts about Cool URLs. It comes full circle!

Wow, that could be a post of it’s own

It’s ideally modeled as a curve, but things are never that simple in real life.

I was going mad for a good chunk of time a while ago figuring out why those blind spots were forming, glad to see I’m not alone

If we know ‘where it came from’ in the sense that the author couldn’t even bother writing anything themselves, why should other people bother reading this deluge of nonsensical strung together words?

That's my point, we won't bother reading it. We'll let agents read it. People will eventually stop getting ticked off at this stuff.

One exception: if the model is poor or on 'low' and that leads to a crappy report. That's the equivalent of shipping performance-critical code built with -O0 in the compiler analogy.

This is a crappy report, that's what is being discussed

Is there any indication that it was a mini/fast/older model, or on a low effort level? My read of the reactions above is "ugh AI", not "ugh AI on the cheap". Not a single poster mentioned model or effort choice. It seems more like the usual irritation at "AI slop".

If you just mean that the result was technically incorrect or off, that's probably true, but it doesn't affect my argument.

At work I am sitting on a small pile of incomplete/wrong/missing-the-point bug reports right now, all generated by Opus 5 on High effort. Even under good conditions, LLMs are still wrong quite a lot, and confidently so. I can see why you think instant dismissal of LLM generated work is shallow, but I think it's at least as shortsighted to assume that when it creates poor quality work it must be an old/cheap model, bad settings, bad prompting, etc.

I'm not arguing that it's great. I'm arguing that the future of human work in this area will be limited to dealing with the cases when it isn't great, i.e. the pile on your desk. Choosing the best model and highest effort is the due diligence required to minimize the size of that pile.