sadly, over here in the netherlands and I assume elsewhere, the job as a postman changed drastically when they privatized. room for the human element has been all but squeezed out for profits long ago.
> People can finally put a name on an unease that's been growing inside them for a while now.
I've had some interesting conversations about the pre-AI slop and how the distinction is often not too meaningful. I mean, on some level /knowing/ that the corporate slop was written by a person kind of loses its meaning when one considers the amount of filtering, rules, rewriting, and so on is involved by a string of people who either don't care about what they write or actively dislike it.
A lot of this stuff often had at least flickers of a human soul behind it. I imagine for a lot of the soaps, hallmark movies, and romance novels this might've made some difference, even if just subconsciously recognizing the author(s) and building up some kind of image around the other by yourself or with others.
I'm reminded of some of the truly awful 'worship' songs I grew up with, and how some of the authors (often of course sticking close to the source material) even had a kind of following. some of these songs were just a little 'too' predictable, but others felt pretty much like they were written by AI, except back then none of us imagined that AI could really do this back then.
Or the pastor I spoke to who was convinced that chatgpt had access to his more personal notes, because as an experiment he made it write a sermon, and it (probably? obviously?) extrapolated from the prompt the more specific theology he followed/ascribed to.
I'm not knocking the value of a sermon or song, even if boring and predictable, or perhaps even when AI-written. they often explicitly /don't/ serve the purpose of being novel or new, but I find it super interesting how these aspects of real life are, to a degree, not too hard to replace with AI.
Thankfully for this pastor, most of his value involved human connection, knowing whoever just married, died, got sick, and having his full humanity on display from the pulpit!
I'd say I'm pretty attuned to detecting AI content and I was fooled a few times at inattentive moments. I imagine a lot of people fare worse, assuming they even truly mind whether it's AI or not.
A lifetime is not that long though, and I'd argue that TV was the start of a chapter that internet, iphones, etc. are just ever-increasingly addictive and immediate iterations on.
I'm not saying that we didn't have anything like that before tv, or that specific individuals or groups throughout history might not have had something similar, but I do feel TV, and especially its audio-visual nature, really changed something in a way that, say, the printing press never quite did.
EDIT: and to add, my feeling on how many people seem to use LLM's is that in a way it's extra insidious because it's /tailored/, often 'puerile' interaction.
Hotmail is a good example too. I remember it being pretty ubiquitous, at least for the 'personal email' crowd, and it seemed implausible that people would give up on what was often their main email 'location' for another offering without being able to transfer their often important and personal stuff. then gmail came along.
Do the big updates to Elixir's type system help at all? afaik the most recent update added a huge amount of coverage that should extend to older code automatically.
> JOSE: Yeah, so what happened is that it was the old concurrency story in which the Clojure audience is going to be really, really familiar. I’ve learned a lot also from Clojure because, at the time I was thinking about Elixir, Clojure was already around. I like to say it’s one of the top three influences in Elixir, but anyway it tells this whole story about concurrency, right?
wouldn't that still add a lot of value, where the person in the loop (sadly, usually) becomes little more than the verifier, but can process a lot more work?
Anecdotally what I'm hearing is that this is pretty much how LLMs are helping programmers get more done, including the work being less enjoyable because it involves more verification and rubber-stamping.
For the business owner, it doesn't matter that the nature of the work has changed, as long as that one person can get more work done. Even worse, the business owner probably doesn't care as much about the quality of the resulting work, as long as it works.
I'm reminded of how much of my work has involved implementing solutions that took less careful thought, where even when I outlined the drawbacks, the owner wanted it done the quick way. And if the problems arose, often quite a bit later, it was as if they hadn't made that initial decision in the first place.
For my personal tinkering, I've all but defaulted to the LLMs returning suggested actions at logical points in the workflow, leaving me to confirm or cancel whatever it came up with. this definitely still makes the process faster, just not as magically automatic.
I've found that the vast majority of clicky stuff I do leads to a URL change anyways, and these are just proper links to the new URL that LV then intercepts.
In your Counter example, it's true that for the 'degraded' version to work, the link would have to be a proper link and not a phx-click. But in the (IMO very unlikely) case where this fallback is necessary, solving it with a proper link/route does not require duplication, just a different approach.
What you would do is create a LiveView that handles both the initial page and the 'increment' route. If LV is 'on', it intercepts the click and patches the page. if LV is 'off', your browser would request the 'increment' route, and the same LV would handle all this server-side and still display the new, incremented counter.
The LV is both the server-side controller /and/ the client-side logic. That's part of what makes it so appealing, but, admittedly, also something that can take a while to wrap your head around.
I've more than once reflexively gone for phx-click solutions where the LV would receive the event and 'do' something, only to later realize that it would be much better to use a proper url/routing solution (where LV is still the 'controller'). In hindsight it's often a case of treating LiveView too much like just 'React on the server', basically.
But there can still be a benefit in disentangling a monolith where some of the parts have no interactions with other parts.
I'm not a devotee of microservices, and most of my experience involves front-end web stuff. I've come across quite a few monoliths in that context that were more difficult to work with than they had to be because, for example, various 'services' had their db and view layers tangled up together even though they really didn't have anything to do with each other. A more 'microservice-y' approach would've made things much easier to work with.
I do agree that a bunch of microservices that end up depending on each other doesn't necessarily improve much, though, and often actually causes problems.
The old FPS games were much more like the bullet-hell shooter games, in 3D and without the spaceships, than like modern shooters.
I think Serious Sam was the last time I played that style of shooter, and while I've enjoyed tons of modern FPS games, they feel very different.
The latest Doom games (the ones after Doom 3, confusingly titled Doom and the upcoming Doom Eternal) do a great job combining that old-school shooter gameplay with more modern elements. I highly recommend them!
I share your feelings when it comes to many games, but I don't think it generally applies to Nintendo.
The problem is that the word 'game' is too vague. Nobody would think to put 'viral videos' and 'Tarantino\'s latest film' in the same pile (except perhaps those who really dislike Tarantino), and yet that's what we do with gaming.
Some games were as good as some of the best novels I've read (Planescape Torment, Thief, System Shock). Some multiplayer games left me with friends for life (UT, Quake, Halo). Some games offered a creative outlet just as rewarding as the Lego or tin soldiers I had growing up (Minecraft, Neverwinter Nights level creation, Chip's Challenge), and some games actually tricked me into learning interesting things (Assassin's Creed 2, Civilization, etc.)
I'm not a parent, but if I had kids I'd probably limit their gaming too, but I'd put way more emphasis on controlling the kind of games they played. Cow Clickers (or most MMORPGS)? Not so much. Minecraft with coding mods? Hell yes!
All that said, if you'd be making an argument against sitting inside and media consumption in general, I'd probably agree a little more. There is still something fundamentally different about playing outside and interacting with other kids directly, and I hope I can make my kids do that instead of just staring at screens all day.