The automatic transmission gives us more dexterity for... what exactly? Fiddling with the dash, reaching for something in the back seat, texting? The best case human has much more control but the average case seems worse off.
In poker some people are gambling. Some may be self-ware, but many aren't and misunderstand why they win or lose. Poker inconsistently and unreliably rewards gambling, much like vibe-coding.
It's the perfect metaphor? Playing correctly/optimally is +EV. But nobody starts there, and many people don't ever get there.
The main difference is that you're exploiting your own weaknesses, rather than others'. Limitations in typing speed, information gathering, pattern recognition.
Yeah this entire thread has a weird vibe. OP is clearly a competent engineer to have wrangled LLMs into building this (whether a 5 day old vibe code lib can survive this initial virality will be interesting to see), but seeing so much engagement with prototypical vacant LLM output is eerie
I can't help but think that Steam Machine/SteamOS/Linux gaming in general is severely bottlenecked by anti-cheat. Nearly all serious multiplayer games require Windows specific anti-cheat.
Maybe there's a critical mass of Linux users that will force AC support. Maybe new cheating paradigms (DMA) will obsolete local AC. I suppose one of those could happen in the next 10 years.
I razz CEOs in jest, but my point is: This is an example of a good phishing attempt? ChatGPT could surely find and fix most of the red flags I called out. Perhaps the red flags ensure they don't phish more people than they can productively exploit.
> We've been on the hunt for this AI host since opting into the test several hours ago, but the robot has yet to appear.
An entire article about a beta feature they haven’t even seen? I normally wouldn’t read Ars but I’m on flight with nothing else to do and still feel swindled
Agreed. It's hard to believe that marketing pages, after decades of evolution and testing, haven't landed on what users actually want, rather than what they say they want.
Scrolling is such a natural behavior for internet natives. Being able to leverage a large screen to visually compare things has its place, but the article uses a horrible example:
> Our condensed product page prototype took the same information from the original dispersed page and arranged it in a 2x2 grid that allowed users to compare multiple services simultaneously, without having to remember the details of each service.
What's to compare? They're disparate services.
I do like the example of the product specifications. But that was more of an objective usability issue: requiring more clicks for more information.