This doesn't seem quite correct to me. They weren't asking for "more validation than was reasonable". They were asking for literally any proof that users would benefit from the proposal. That seems like an entirely reasonable thing to ask before changing the way every single NPM package gets published, ever.
I do agree that 10k/week is non-negligible. Perhaps that means the people responsible for the 10k weren't in the room?
Most sources, but not all! To me, watching 8 hours of puppies, kittens and rainbows in a day would have a pretty negative impact on my life. That kind of content is negative when it becomes excessive. Heroin feels really good when you use it too. Doesn't make it a positive thing.
Wow, you've totally cracked the mystery. This explains why all the commenters are at each other's throats - half of them are reading it one way and half are reading the other way, and only one of the two ways makes any sense.
I don't like this post, mainly because I think I don't like the attitude behind it. It seems somewhat obvious to me that people who do care exist and are out there; all you have to do is go and ask people what they care about and you'll get some interesting answers. You can choose to view the world as having no one who cares, but that seems seems a distorted way of viewing the world. And distorted in way that will make you more lonely, since you aren't looking for other people like yourself, since you've concluded they don't exist.
I read the blog post feeling the author's rage, but your insight is far more important. Humanity's collective goodwill is stifled by friction and inertia while moneyed interests are given jetpacks.
This is nothing new. Bringing ideas from DND into video games is as old as video games themselves. In interviews, John Carmack talks often about how he used to play DND with his friends and then try to take that experience into the games he made. And it goes back even further than that - Rogue, the primogenitor of all roguelike games, was inspired by DND as well. I could find a bunch more examples, but you get the idea.
This is a rare case where I think I preferred the Wikipedia article - the neutral, impassive retelling of events somehow makes more of an impression on me, whereas I don't like so much the breathless style of the new article.
The thing that everyone seems to miss here is it's not surprising which code falls into the 80% or 20%. I can guess if an AI will write something bug-free with almost 100% accuracy. For the remaining 20%, whatever, it gives me a fine enough starting point.
How often do you need to solve a problem like that in practice? Try asking it something that actually comes up in your day-to-day and you might have a different experience.
I asked ChatGPT last year to give me the top five breakfast restaurants in Houston according to Reddit, sources included, no fake links. It gave me three or four real restaurants and one fake one. All (all!) of the links were fake.
I do this every time I'm in a different city. Most of the data that I use is from the last three years.
I don’t understand how you’re being “difficult” by not keeping up to date on the Facebook updates of your friends. I will of course update all my close friends 1:1 on any life changes, and I expect they will do the same to me. For everyone else, there’s nothing “difficult” about asking for a life update the next time you see them. If anything, it shows interest and is a kind thing to do.
I might guess my comment here in a "meta sense" is looked down upon here (for good reason) but that comment you responded to rings a certain way and along with other dialog here and the issue at hand (world scale industry of eyeballs and diversion) i have to politely guess the thought of astroturfing that came to me might be fair.
I do agree that 10k/week is non-negligible. Perhaps that means the people responsible for the 10k weren't in the room?
reply