Only tangential, but I recently discovered that VS Code also picks up paths in `.ignore` to decided whether to include paths in search. I knew that `.gitignore` is automatically picked up, but was surprised when all of a sudden directories that weren't supposed to show up in file search started showing up -- it's because I had unignored them in `.ignore` for ripgrep. Makes sense I suppose.
It can be quite useful to check in project-wide shared editor settings so that everyone in the team is using the same linter/formatter editor settings. We do that in my team for VS Code settings and extensions, even tasks.
I haven't checked if there's a way to maintain a project-scoped _personal_ `.vscode` for those idiosyncratic settings or extensions you want applied to only this project but wouldn't be appropriate to foist on everyone else. I hope there is.
You're crazy if you think the target demo of "business leaders" and "thought leaders" aren't going to dump it into their favorite LLM first thing and prompt their way into a summary.
The "muse vs. writer" framing is a good start, but the real issue is the source of inspiration. An AI prompted on a blank slate will only ever generate a sophisticated average of its training data. The workflow is broken. A better system doesn't start with "What should I write?" but with "What have I learned?" Using AI to synthesize your unique takeaways from high-signal content you've already consumed—a podcast, a talk—is how you scale authenticity, not just words.
I'm the founder of Castifai.com, which is built for this. It systematizes the "muse" by creating a workflow that starts with content you consume (talks, podcasts) and turns your insights into authentic drafts, solving the input problem.
This isn't a content problem; it's a systems problem. The pressure to create without a pipeline for genuine insights leads to these templates. Authentic thought leadership should be a byproduct of a consumption and synthesis workflow, not a forced, separate task.
I've been working on solving this - first for myself and then for others - by building a tool for this called Castifai. It's a consumption-first workflow that helps turn insights from content you already consume into authentic posts, so you're sharing what you know, not just filling a quota. (I'm the founder). You can try it at castifai.com
Why is so much of generated AI art so... literal? The cover art of this PDF literally spells out what the graphics are supposed to represent. The vast majority of AI visuals on LinkedIn are the same way. If this is what's in store as the future of art, at least commercial art -- feels like a huge step backwards if I'm being honest.
And anyway, what's the point of generating a massive tome like this on a topic evolving as fast as agentic software? Sure it will be outdated within months, if not weeks...
I’m guessing because it’s not produced by artists or people who has an eye for art generally.
When it comes to the book, changes are 80% is written by AI. I mean lots of content produced just pure AI, I’m following some AI subreddits and majority of the posts very obviously generate with couple of prompts, they don’t even bother styling while copy pasting. I’m really struggling to read online content recently.
Partly it's a byproduct of the way that prompting works. Partly it's that the majority of people generating content with AI are not skilled at conceptualizing imagery in the way creative professionals are. I think it's moreso the latter.
Could it be since a lot of the data is trained on captions? At least if I'm remembering correctly, that's what they use to create the association between what's seen and what's said.
In this case, as a solo dev, it's probably quite justified to be honest. I doubt ConcernedApe would have really been able to continue solo-ing it with this level of success if he also had to maintain distribution channels, sales/returns, marketing, legal stuff on a global scale.
It's probably the big name studios who already have entire departments to do that kind of stuff that feel they're being ripped off.
Actually the more you earn the worse the deal is - he's probably paid about $100 million for what amounts to $100,000s of labor if he paid people to take care of this stuff, and some (low) millions in taxes collected for various jurisdictions. Dude's personally bought Gabe a ship in exchange for some accounting.
I bought :( Loved the thing, but yeah batter life wasn't the best. Also noticed that app developers would sometimes not take into account the smaller viewport on the Mini, and so app views would sometimes look too squished or out of place. That 's a minor grouse though compared to the subpar batter life.
The more you put yourself in social settings (online, offline, whatever), the more you increase the surface area for finding someone through "pure random chance". Just adding a more optimistic bent to things.
Exactly, dating apps are just one tool in the toolbox, and one that doesn't work well for a lot of people at that (in my experience, the types of people that I would be interested in dating generally aren't on dating apps, so I stopped using them.)
The trick is to find out where you're likely to meet the types of people you are interested in: interest groups, college campus, gaming Discords, climbing gym, etc. I think in dating, diversification is key, because the types of people you will find in any given environment can be highly autocorrelated in terms of preferences and personality.
The other trick is to actually flirt with people when you like someone. A minority of people might not take it well, but it actually brightens a lot of people's days when done respectfully and it's the only way to have a chance at getting somewhere.
You’re right. As a hetero man, I was not doing activities that included many women. But I still don’t know what I could’ve done differently, because doing activities involving women that I don’t enjoy, so that I can be on the lookout for potential dates… doesn’t seem very enjoyable, and also seems a bit creepy. On the other hand, going to activities I don’t enjoy and not looking for dates seems rather pointless.
You’re always going to be seen as creepy until some woman doesn’t. That’s just the norms we have in society right now. You’re a threat until proven otherwise.
Most social activities that involve strangers are also full of men. This is because most men aren’t interested in going out and meeting new people they have no social connection with. Women go to parties, outings with other friends, etc. Men go to things alone like bars, clubs, gyms, sports, etc. to meet new people and bond with absolutely complete strangers. Most women don’t do this at all.
I did that. I had plenty of friends, but no girlfriends ;)
I realized that increasing the surface area mostly only matters if you’re increasing the surface area of meeting the kind of person you want to date. As a hetero man, I was not doing activities that included many women. But I still don’t know what I could’ve done differently, because doing activities involving women that I don’t enjoy, so that I can be on the lookout for potential dates… doesn’t seem very enjoyable, and also seems a bit creepy. On the other hand, going to activities I don’t enjoy and not looking for dates seems rather pointless.
> Google will sell Google Cloud Services to Oracle to cut their losses
Now that is a hot take! I’d like to see this happen just to experience the meltdown this would cause in this community. If you thought the Sun acquisition didn’t go down so well…
I have grown to dislike "jugaad" solutions to problems (unless it is forced onto the problem through sheer necessity), mainly because -- if left unchecked -- it fosters a culture of doing just barely enough to meet minimum requirements and no adherence or even ambition to achieving excellence and craftsmanship.
I recognize that jugaad solutions are usually not what people necessarily want to resort to, but are frequently adopted because of lack of viable alternatives. In such situations, more power to us / them! I'd call that being resourceful though. Aspiring to arrive to the jugaad solution to problems when better ways of doing it are within reach though, that's where I draw the line.
```
... mainly because -- if left unchecked -- it fosters a culture of doing just barely enough to meet minimum requirements and no adherence or even ambition to achieving excellence and craftsmanship.
```
that is exactly my major gripe with TDD style development. It just seems too /incremental/ and smacks of prioritising getting /specific/ features done, rather than finding the best overall design. with this tactical style development, it is quite easy to end up with a mess.
That's why I like the other TDD, type driven development. Lay out all your types and make unwanted states literally unrepresentable. For example, if you're making an email sending service, you can have an EmailAddress type that is represented underneath by a string and the only way you can instantiate a new EmailAddress is via the constructor function which will take a string, parse it and validate it as an email, and if it works, it returns the EmailAddress type, otherwise it returns None (if you're using a Result typed language). And the sender function only accepts an EmailAddress, not a string, so if your EmailAddress constructor returns None, you literally can't send the email, by design.
> it fosters a culture of doing just barely enough to meet minimum requirements and no adherence or even ambition to achieving excellence and craftsmanship
This criticism can be raised against Agile as well, but I think this attitude ultimately comes from utilitarian (or MBA) perspective, which puts monetary profits above human or engineering excellence.
> I have grown to dislike "jugaad" solutions to problems
Maybe it takes an outsider's view to appreciate jugaad. I certainly didn't on my first encounter.
> no adherence or even ambition to achieving excellence and craftsmanship
I agree - jugaad isn't the place for planned evolution, so skills that transcend the immediate needs for delivery never form.
> Aspiring to arrive to the jugaad solution to problems when better ways of doing it are within reach though, that's where I draw the line.
I think that most developers in India aren't even aware of the jugaad methodology, it's just the way things are done. When I was first exposed to jugaad I mistook it for sloppiness, but it turned out that both deliverables and the organisational setup itself is extremely anti-fragile: it's always easy to add or remove a part, although refactoring is hard.
Heh, this is an interesting perspective and Im realizing some assumptions Ive come to rely on.
When designing a system or writing code, my instinct is to write it in a way that makes it clear, easy to work with and change down the road, because Ive seen code that is not structured this way and working with it is hell. I consider myself somewhat lucky to have worked in teams that allow for this.
If however I wasn’t fortunate enough, or just not paid enough even, or the work culture didn’t exist or was purely transactional, I would likely change my approach to fit that situation.
That's hardly a crazy stat, you're merely viewing it through a Western lens. In plenty of Asian cultures it is uncommon for people to have sexual experience before marriage.
Not necessarily western, dating an American girl can be quite special. Not only meant negatively, but it is something else. Different focus, different interests,...
reply