The argument is based on the assumption that knowing what DNS, SSH, etc., is an innate good for the average person. But why should it be? The average user does not have the time or interest to run arbitrary code on their phone. In the same way that I do not have the time or interest to service my own car. Could I learn it if need be? Probably. Could they learn how to SSH into a server, change DNS settings, or clone a git repo? Probably. Is either of them worth our time? Probably not.
"You’ve built a generation that can’t extract a zip file without a dedicated app and calls it innovation"
OK, I'll bite - how does anyone extract a zip file with no dedicated app? Does one write their own un-zip app?
You can do it, yes. But use of LLMs is not a binary variable - a merely polished text might look like a generated one in its entirety. So you if you prioritize "human-looking" context (I do not) you'd be in disadvantage.
The argument is based on the assumption that knowing what DNS, SSH, etc., is an innate good for the average person. But why should it be? The average user does not have the time or interest to run arbitrary code on their phone. In the same way that I do not have the time or interest to service my own car. Could I learn it if need be? Probably. Could they learn how to SSH into a server, change DNS settings, or clone a git repo? Probably. Is either of them worth our time? Probably not.
"You’ve built a generation that can’t extract a zip file without a dedicated app and calls it innovation" OK, I'll bite - how does anyone extract a zip file with no dedicated app? Does one write their own un-zip app?
Unzip /*
and how is unzip not a dedicated app?
While message is good, this ChatGPT article is unreadable. If this, then that. No point in reading some distilled, glossed over LLM bullshit.
But power user is dying and they are unable to write even a single blog post now.
Please further explain what you mean. I think this is a pretty interesting and well written article, but your comment made me doubt myself.
> If this, then that. No point in reading some distilled, glossed over LLM bullshit.
My advice would be to get used to this style, or otherwise you'd risk to miss out lots of interesting articles.
> My advice would be to get used to this style
this style is like nails on a chalkboard. if they can’t care enough to make it readable, then they couldn’t pay me to care to read it
I can generate my own interesting articles. Just skip the middleman.
You can do it, yes. But use of LLMs is not a binary variable - a merely polished text might look like a generated one in its entirety. So you if you prioritize "human-looking" context (I do not) you'd be in disadvantage.