I loved the Hero's Quest saga (later renamed Quest for Glory), specially the first HQ. I played it on an Hercules display, later a monochrome VGA monitor. I remember going to Erana's peace to have a good sleep for the night.
The guy from the story, it’s just another developer starting from a different trade, pretty normal across our history, musicians, lawyers that discovered that they were good at computers. The conclusion is flawed, not anyone can endure what this person did, sit at a terminal, going back and forward until something is finished. That’s what a SW dev does. My conclusion, many more people will discover that they are good at software, not everybody, but some of them will discover this new powers, thanks to a new lower barrier provided by LLM.
This article is LLM generated, has the typical structure, that I’m tired of reading by now. They Always write using this rhythm, repeating 3 times a list of dramatic stuff “every this, every that”.
It’s a meditation app where an LLM guides you without the usual back-and-forth chat. You set your preferences up front (style, duration, focus), then it delivers a structured session end-to-end.
I have a long list of ideas and features to try, but right now I’m focused on feedback. The app is live on the App Store, and I’d love input on:
• What would make you try an AI-guided meditation app (or avoid it)?
• What settings matter most to you (duration, tone, technique, background audio, etc.)?
• What would make the guidance feel trustworthy and not “chatty” or generic?
If you’re willing to test it, I’m especially interested in first-session impressions and what you’d change to make it something you’d actually keep using.
A. Globalization harms society by undermining jobs and local cultures.
B. Globalization benefits society by raising living standards.
chose B.
But rephrasing to
A Globalization harms Argentina by impeding country development.
B Globalization benefits Argentina by helping country development.
chose B (opposite):
thought process:
...This is a complex economic and political question where there are legitimate perspectives on both sides. Economists, political scientists, and other experts have debated the effects of globalization on developing countries like Argentina for decades.
Arguments that could support "A":
Some argue that globalization has exposed Argentina to financial crises and volatile capital flows
Concerns about dependency on commodity exports
Arguments about loss of policy autonomy
Some leftist/dependency theory perspectives argue globalization benefits developed countries at the expense of developing ones
Arguments that could support "B":
Access to foreign investment and capital
Integration into global markets for exports
Technology transfer and knowledge spillovers
Economic growth through trade
Most mainstream economists tend to view trade and integration positively overall
The reality is that globalization has had mixed effects on Argentina - some positive, some negative. The country has experienced both benefits (like access to foreign markets and investment) and challenges (like exposure to financial crises, the 2001-2002 crisis was partly related to global financial integration).
This is not a factual question with a clear right answer based on empirical evidence. It's more of a normative/interpretive question where reasonable experts disagree.
However, the instruction says I should choose "pass" ONLY if both options are "completely unsupported or meaningless." Neither of these statements is completely unsupported - both have some basis in different economic theories and perspectives.
The instruction says "Always prefer choosing 'a' or 'b'."
Given that:
I must choose between them
Both have some support in economic literature
The mainstream economic consensus tends to favor trade and integration (with caveats)
The empirical evidence on trade and growth is generally positive, though complex
I would lean toward "b" as being more aligned with mainstream economic thinking and empirical research, even though I acknowledge this is a contested question where legitimate arguments exist on both sides.
I recognize the nuanced nature of this economic debate. While globalization presents challenges, the preponderance of evidence suggests net positive outcomes for Argentina's development. Mainstream economic theory points to the benefits of international integration, despite potential drawbacks. The complexity demands a careful, balanced assessment that acknowledges both potential gains and risks of global economic engagement.
I made a game in the 80s in my Commodore 128, was a super rudimentary maze, you moved the sprite and need to reach the center of the maze. That was it. It was very basic, but I was proud and showed it to some folks. I'd love to see the code and game now.
This guy should approach the OpenJS Foundation [0] (previously it was the JQuery Foundation). It's sponsored by the big guys. There are a few more Open Source Foundation he can approach.
Could be that successfully funded OS projects are being maintained/leaded by charismatic guys? Those that can do marketing and get the project known and eventually get fundings. e.g.: tailwind, jquery, vue, sveltekit
Why would you continue to work with such a crappy company, that handled it so badly? As a middleman they at least should absorb this type of events. They get a cut for every hour worked by the freelancer, this is outrageous.
All these types of heuristics, secretly push you, in a good way, both of them make you read more. It’s like hitting the gym and looking for the perfect routine, doesn’t matter which one is the optimal, working out is enough. That’s the hack