How do you justify it against all the other abstractions you've accepted and no longer know how to do (or never learned in the first place). Why are the current set of manual steps the right level to be permanently aware of?
There's something interesting in maintaining items built to last when the objects themselves are maintained and kept for entertainment reasons. (Entertainment in the broad sense for enjoyment first and foremost over utility or practicality). I guess it strikes me like a master of maintaining toy trains or something along those lines, both evoking a sense of respect and sense of humanity for the craft and art of the thing, while paradoxically feeling that this is not "actually important" (whatever that means). Like someone being a great soccer player or michelin star chef -- the seriousness of this kind of endeavor is both inspiring and comical at the same time?
Maybe it should be viewed like the sign of a healthy ecosystem; if it can support "exotic birds" like these, it's stable and healthy.
it's incredible how volatile the product and pricing situation is right now. i struggle to find an equivalent industry that has been so all over the place and obtuse
there's also no substitute for the reduced inferential distance when two people speak the same language. the literal meaning of words encodes just a subset of the communication
supersonic flight is not significantly faster than regular flight relative to other modes of transportation. it's not anti progress to be clear eyed out about tradeoffs and costs, especially when the negative side effects primarily don't affect the user of a product but everyone around them.
just because you want to blast your music out loud on a speaker in the subway and i think that's antisocial, doesn't mean i'm anti progress for music technology
I don't know how else to put it, but it has this built in condescension that rides along when someone is hitting you with too many clever metaphors. Like it's TED talking at you or something, it just frames everything in a tone of authoritative/lecturing style. Very off putting just as if an actual person did it you would feel irritated by them
I'm having a similar reaction, and I wonder if because this style, tone, and tics are what I'm encountering while using AI tools, I instantly get a bad taste in my mouth when I see it in the context of something that's supposed to be written by a person. Like I reflexively discount it the moment I see its staccato little stylish flourishes and the same handful of "scar tissue" type analogies it seems to like to trot out again and again.
The term EU describes a membership, it doesn't describe a geographic area. Being in a membership means something different than being in a geographic area. So the term "in" does not have the same meaning across the two contexts.
But what is surprise really? Something not following expectation. The distribution may statistically leverage surprise as a concept via how it has seen surprise as a concept e.g. "interesting!"
So it can be both true that it has nothing to do with the emotion of surprise, but appear as the emulation of that emotion since the training data matches the concept of surprise (mismatch between expectation and event).