So, I think of articles like this that evaluate "software" or "tools" or the value of "coding" so often miss the huge point of "there are a lot of different kinds of software/tools."
It just depends on what you're DOING. It's all so very subjective. And I think the smart direction here would be for us to be clearer and force ourselves to be more specific when we begin to evaluate approaches like this.
Certain types of work NEED invisible tools. Other types of work NEED "legible" complexity. To say nothing of individual preferences.
I just don't see much value in sweeping generalizations like this article.
So, I'm a college instructor, and sometimes I find myself reading a paper that I dislike -- and as I get into it I'm finding that I'm mentally arguing with the content and the actual argument(s) (as opposed to "quality of writing") and that's when I realize this person should get a good grade.
This is like that for me; he sounds kind of annoying, but as they say, points were made.
That's the objective answer. There's no mystery here. That's exactly how you get what you want and it's not too hard. Not trying to dunk on you or anyone one but this is an easily solved problem, and I think I want to highlight it like this to make sure everyone understands.
Anything web/internet/network service thing, you can add this on. This composability is important to remember in software, this even goes back to "The Unix Way" type stuff.
Right, I think the major thing that both of you are unwittingly dancing around is the extent to which AAV is generally "popular," almost subconsciously. Especially in the US, but I'd argue the whole world.
It would be exceedingly difficult to strongly distinguish it from "Gen Whatever Slang" or "US Slang" or a lot of "LGTBQ Slang" etc etc. The list goes on.
This is going to be a thing where the individual parties might get something like reliable anonymity, and Google will still be able to trace it, right?
It's funny, and perhaps not entirely unwarranted, that "racism" pops up here?
As a Black American, I find the author's idea extremely interesting and naturally began to wonder -- what might this idea (in code?) look like for us?
Owing to history and whatnot, the role "Black American English" might play is of course very much a moving target, but it's interesting to think about.
An interesting problem in the background of this is the cope.
Which is to say, there are a lot of people who think "they can tell AI" in music, wherein you can cue the famous picture of the airplane with the bulletholes.
I'm not sure what you can do about it, and part of me hates it too -- but youtube has absolutely given me 100% AI generated music that's full of soul and better than, say, Bruno Mar,s IMHO.
(For those interested, my two examples would be the gospel "Thong Song" and the fake rock-n-roll dis track against 50 cent "by TI's Son," 2 quarters...)
Nothing personal, but there's something hilarious about "I demand a quick and easy solution to a likely practically impossible problem once you get into details" -- in opposition to AI.
I think you're doing the thing I'm literally railing against; I believe the tendency to turn a relatively simple concept like "we should have a society that has peace and also favorable trades" into IDEOLOGY is precisely how we end up with overreach.
It just depends on what you're DOING. It's all so very subjective. And I think the smart direction here would be for us to be clearer and force ourselves to be more specific when we begin to evaluate approaches like this.
Certain types of work NEED invisible tools. Other types of work NEED "legible" complexity. To say nothing of individual preferences.
I just don't see much value in sweeping generalizations like this article.