Socializing is the part of work that was making me incredibly more stressed and less productive. Interactions with coworkers is what made me basically have a burnout.

It doesn’t take much empathy to understand that not everyone loves social interactions, and especially not with people that they don’t choose and that can determine whether or not they get fired. If you like to chat at work, sure, enjoy yourself, but don’t start making it look like it’s a universally good thing.

I don’t know why you’re using the past tense, the church is still defending them.

Yeah and the catholics are the most moral and good people around.

Who the fuck sees Catholicism as a proof of success?

Or, you know.

Humans are a bunch of savage monkeys, and it’s up to them to make up rules that enforce what is best for everyone, and morals do that. And if you sacrifice morals to follow an illusion of success, then that’s a problem and I’m going to call you on it.

I don’t believe in the idea that “if most people want shit then let them have it”.

Kids want to eat kilos of candies, yet you don’t let them eat it and die. Well it’s the same with humans. If a majority is having shit values or morals, then you need to educate them, not let them be. The idea of letting things be is what led to things like the nazis, where no one wanted to oppose them until half of their country was invaded.

And understanding things without experiencing is called empathy, and it’s a trainable skill. Which also needs to be enforced upon people. It’s crazy to me that prehistoric humans were having more empathy than current humans, even though we now have thousands of years of philosophy behind us.

All in all, we need to stop being so complacent about others being shitty, and start enforcing rules and safeguard that force people to be held to a certain moral standard. That’s how we’ll evolve.

J’espère que vous êtes prets pour le désastre

Contre les fachos ?

Comment se fait-il que la police n’arrête pas ces vilains terroristes !?

/s

The fact that people like batman is a problem.

If you think that everyone should do what works without any concern about what is right, that’s your issue.

I love the fact that the only details you gave about your story are money, skin color, country of origin.

Maybe the problem is that if your character is only defined by their skin color and wealth, it’s not a very good character. You should be able to have a better description of someone than just talking about their skin color and bank account.

So it feels a bit shallow, from whatever small information you gave, which might be what your friend picked on.

We’re talking about hypothetical changes, obviously it would require more funding. The point being, if you’re going to do a system change, more funding will always work better than trying to make citations cost money.

Yeah I don’t have the mental energy to decrypt your messages, you’re just saying a bunch on nonsense and I’m not really wanting to spend so long trying to see what a slopbro is trying to say.

Have a nice day

France for now, until Macron makes his own militia to take control of France

I have no idea what you’re talking about.

For a book, there are per-unit costs of the materials, ink, paper, manufacturing, etc.

For an ebook, these are void. So the cost should be, at the very least, much lower than a physical book. Even if you take into account the effort of writing the book and such, it’s an initial cost, so it doesn’t justify a high price.

The point being, physical items have costs related to their physicality, digital items don’t, so they shouldn’t cost as much. It’s pretty straightforward.

And to loop back to my initial comment: that’s why it’s absurd to compare AIs, which are just bullshit for lazy sloppy people, and manufacturing processes, which come from the need to reduce the manufacturing costs of physical items. There is no manufacturing cost of software, so there is no need to mass-produce as fast as possible, and so there is just no reason to let devs throw up slop garbage to go “faster”

Also, on a side note: programming with AIs don’t make you code faster, it just increases the amount of bugs and problems with your code. Obviously, since you’re just using a nonsense generator to try to produce a complex piece of digital machinery.

What? How do you even reach such a conclusion?

It’s not a tool, it’s a chaos generator.

Don’t let people who build houses do it with cardboard boxes instead of bricks, even if it looks like a house in the end.

They cost nothing to duplicate, yes, which is why you wouldn’t pay as much as a physical book for it.

What’s your point?

No because the nail gun is a proper tool that has been made properly.

But actually thanks for making me think about it, because my example is inaccurate. It’s not like shooting in the wall, but more like giving a gun to a trained monkey and telling it to shoot at the wall.

Sure, you can wear a helmet and tell people to duck so they don’t get shot, and sure it is easier than using a hammer yourself. However everyone would agree that it’s stupid as fuck.

LLMs don’t understand code. They don’t understand anything at all, to be exact.

So why on earth would you give to a tool that has the sole purpose of bullshitting convincingly, the task of doing skilled labor on complex systems?

Also, in your example, a nailgun would be a framework or whatever, that is making your job easier. It still has to be reliable. In no way could AI be likened to that.

An incompetent human is better than throwing a bunch of dice and hoping that it’s the answer. An engineer that tells me that instead of using a hammer, they shoot a hole in the wall with a gun because it makes it easier to put a nail in, is not an engineer but a walking threat.

Also, you’re not an open source dev if you use AI, your a code ape copying and stealing unattributed code.

Defend what?

It’s like trying to defend a guy accused of cannibalism, while he’s in the court eating the witnesses

Even if it is theoretically possible to overcome it, I don’t think that it can be assumed that it’s the case for most people, and/or that they wouldn’t have preferred death.

Not minimising what you went through, but the specific kind of abuse I was targeting messes up a gigantic amount of things in the brain. You end up being fucked up on so many points that more often than not, it’s not possible to recover from.

I’ve known people struggle for years and years before just dying, and others struggle for decades with problems seeming to get worse rather than better.

Nowadays people try to make it look like it’s just one trauma amongst others, but for a lot (most?) of the victims, it’s a source of endless suffering and often makes their lives much worse than if they died instead.

And you’re not rambling, we’re just having a conversation, no worries. This is the internet, if I don’t want to read no one forces me to

I was not making a joke so you were on point.

I think that if you ask people that went through that kind of abuse as kids, you’ll realise that they never heal from it. When you know those people, you see that they either would have preferred to die, or made it happen.

Child abuse is horrible and generally not something that can be heal. That kind of abuse is even worse.