> They don't take shortcuts or resort to ugly hacks.
In my experience that is all they do, and you constantly have to fight them to get the quality up, and then fight again to prevent regressions on every change.
With Nostr you can host your content anywhere, but for it to actually be discoverable, you need to declare that host. Third parties therefore cannot really solve the problem for you, without your help.
> In LiftKit, everything derives from the golden ratio, from margins to font size to border radius and beyond. Everything renders in perfect proportion to everything else, creating a unique sense of harmony you can’t get anywhere else.
I’m not sure, the moment I opened the page there was something unusually satisfying about the buttons (that had bothered me about shadcn), so I guess there is some method to the madness.
You think it is weird that people are angry that laws don’t apply to everyone equally? If the laws are bad, we should change them. Not apply them selectively whenever and to whomever we like.
Regardless of your opinion on that (I largely agree with you), that is not the current law, and people went to prison for FAR less. Remember Aaron Swartz, for example.
You don’t need a third party, or anybodies permission, nobody can censor you or block your transactions, you don’t need a bank account with everything that entails. The barrier of entry is the same as creating an SSH keypair. It works globally, fast, cheap. You do not need to trust anybody, all the code is open and the ledger is cryptographically verifiable by anyone. There are lots of advantages.
In this scenario, the repo owner can just merge the patch but still refuse to pay back the shitcoin. With escrow, the escrow entity would act as an arbiter
This is exactly the process happening in the music space with Suno. Go to their subreddit, they all talk about how they only listen to ‘their’ songs, for the exact reasons you list.
It is very different with music. Music and images fall into "just shit something and I don't care what is is" category.
Most people prompting for things in this category will be satisfied with anything, they might not admit, but the degrees of freedom the model has is infinite. Now when you pin the output, let's say a character you generated, and ask for modifications WHILE KEEPING lots of characteristics, you reduce the degrees of freedom from infinite to a small, very constrained, set of states. There are workarounds but natively llms can't really do this. You ask the model to rotate an image, the hair becomes blue and the sword becames an axe.
With music this is much more pronounced because most people are musically illiterate, so even the basic mistakes while dragging characteristics over diffs becomes invisible. It's an interesting phenomenon I agree, but it says more about lack of taste and illiteracy of the common individual.
But on the point of "thinking hard", with music and artistic production in general, individuals (human with soul, not npc) crave for ideas and perspective. It is the play, the relationship between ideas that are hard to vocalize and describe but can be provocative. Because we cannot describe or understand, we have no choice other than provoke into another a similar contemplation.
But make no mistake, nobody is enjoying llm slop. They have fantasies that now they can produce something of value, or delegate this production. If this becomes true, instantly they lose and everyone goes directly to the source.
Art is specifically about communicating the inconceivable, cannot be delegated. If the tool is sufficient to produce art, then the expression is of the tool itself, now they ARE.
> But because this is not the case, we appreciate Tarantino more than we appreciate gangster movies.
Do we? I don't think people appreciate tarantino more than gangster movies. Don't think people appreciate tarantino more than pulp fiction. Frankly, tarantino doesn't factor in at all.
> It is about the process.
I never considered the process when watching pulp fiction. It's the finished product, not the process, that matters.
Put it this way, we know who tarantino is because of pulp fiction. Not the other way around.
> But Pulp Fiction would not have been a masterpiece if Tarantino just typed “Write a gangster movie.” into a prompt field.
Doesn’t that prove the point? You could do that right now, and it would be absolute trash. Just like how right now we are nowhere close to being able to make great software with a single prompt.
I’ve been vibecoding a side project and it has been three months of ideating, iterating, refining and testing. It would have taken me immeasurably longer without these tools, but the end result is still 100% my vision, and it has been a tremendous amount of work.
More to your original point, Tarantino is actually well known for his deliberate uses of rare lenses. He doesn't grind them himself, but he did resurrect a dead lens format for The Hateful Eight:
Yes, let's go back to when BigCo just removed mountains to get at coal, Dick Cheney's friends all got rich in Iraq and the Sacklers sold us all pills because they had convinced the relevant agencies that doing so was in accordance with the laws, rules and policies and well, the rest is history.
All this crap has been happening forever. It may very well be happening more now (probably is, IMO), but it's happening in the open. It's all being litigated. Every capricious decision that would have sailed right over the heads of the non-thinking morons with a simple stamp of approval, maybe a small lawsuit in particularly offensive cases, is now being scrutinized and seriously litigated, because the agencies and other "legitimizers" involves have burned through their stored trust, and now everyone is watching everything they do.
In my experience that is all they do, and you constantly have to fight them to get the quality up, and then fight again to prevent regressions on every change.
reply