37 karma · joined December 24, 2013
Odds are very high at this point that I've come across a piece of content I enjoyed that was at least partly written by an LLM without having detected it.
> power being used by the data center is renewable
That doesn't change anything about the content itself. AI writing is a disservice to the reader. Why should I even care to read an article you didn't even care about writing yourself? At this point a 300-character tweet would've achieved the same effect.
> Booleans look tidy until somebody adds a third case and exhaustiveness silently doesn’t kick in. Strings narrow honestly.
Like, nobody truly writes like that. It wouldn't get past any competent editor.
Strings narrow honestly? What does that even mean? This kind of 3-word precision is useless and they appear everywhere in the article. We get the point with in the first sentence, no need to add more.
They do not have to host your game that they don’t like and that doesn’t make it censorship.
Naming everything ExampleX is very difficult to see what is being talked about in this particular function.
I'm lucky to know enough about Dart already, because this is a very bad representation of it, IMO.
Also, a personal preference of mine is having the new message text box on the bottom.
Keep it up!
What about Hacker News' design? I guess everybody agrees it's ugly, but it gets the job done. I think your just being over-picky for nothing.
I actually find the new design to be more pleasing to the eye and a lot cleaner. And my search results are still as good as before, so who cares.
Also, functional programming is such a mess.
I think you get my point.
I'd rather have code written in simple, well factored functions and classes and easy to reason about, than having to deal with such a mess of functional code.
Don't get me wrong, functional code can be very elegant and clear, but the example provided here is a huge turn off to me.