TIL that some people spell cooperate with an "ö". As a Swedish native it really breaks my reading of an English word, but apparently it's supposed to indicate that you should pronounce each "o" separately. Language is fun.
Using umlauts to signal that a vowel is pronounced separately is common in a number of languages (like Dutch).
Yeah, I know.
It's just confusing for us poor Swedes since "ö" in Swedish is a separate letter with its own pronunciation, and not a somehow-modified "o". Always takes an extra couple of seconds to remember how "Motörhead" is supposed to be said. :)
You’re absolutely right. The patterns you’ve noted, from document verbosity to informational decay in summaries, are the primary symptoms. Would you like me to explain the feedback loop that reinforces this behavior and its potential impact on organizational knowledge integrity?
Got it — here’s a satiric AI-slop style reply you could post under rvnx: Thank you for your profound observation. Indeed, the paradox you highlight demonstrates the recursive interplay between explanation and participation, creating a meta-layered dialogue that transcends the initial exchange. This recursive loop, far from being trivial, is emblematic of the broader epistemological challenge we face in discerning sin…
* Trying 20.54.123.42:443...
* Connected to api.openai.azure.com (20.54.123.42) port 443 (#0)
* ALPN, offering h2
* ALPN, offering http/1.1
* successfully set certificate verify locations:
* CAfile: /etc/ssl/certs/ca-certificates.crt
* TLSv1.3 (OUT), TLS handshake, Client hello (1):
* TLSv1.3 (IN), TLS handshake, Server hello (2):
* TLSv1.3 (IN), TLS handshake, Encrypted Extensions (8):
* TLSv1.3 (IN), TLS handshake, Certificate (11):
* TLSv1.3 (IN), TLS handshake, CERT verify (15):
* TLSv1.3 (IN), TLS handshake, Finished (20):
* TLSv1.3 (OUT), TLS handshake, Finished (20):
* SSL connection using TLSv1.3 / AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384
> POST /v1/chat/completions HTTP/1.1
> Host: api.openai.azure.com
> User-Agent: curl/7.88.1
> Accept: /
> Content-Type: application/json
> Authorization: Bearer sk-xxxx
> Content-Length: 123
>
* upload completely sent off: 123 out of 123 bytes
https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=2213926 if you keep seeing this error. (Please include the request ID d7fc0c4f-4c08-415c-b22b-3b9a59524a41 in your email.)","type":"server_error","param":null,"code":null}}
* Connection #0 to host api.openai.azure.com left intact
curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 500
Unfortunately that seems to be the norm now – people literally reduce themselves to a copy-paste mechanism.
This resonates a lot with some observations I drafted last week about "AI Slop" at the workplace. Overall, people are making a net-negative contribution by not having a sense of when to review/filter the responses generated by AI tools, because either (i) someone else is required to make that additional effort, or (ii) the problem is not solved properly. This sounds similar to a few patterns I noted - The average len…
I have never seen an AI meeting summary that was useful or sufficient in explaining what happened in the meeting. I have no idea what people use them for other than as a status signal
I’m guessing this list is defined by Mac users who all got taught em dash somewhere similar or for similar reasons. It is only easy to use on a Mac. But I wonder what is the 2nd common influence of users using it?
On Linux I just type (in sequence): compose - - and it makes an em dash, it takes a quarter of a second longer to produce this. I don't know why the compose key isn't used more often.
The compose key feels mandatory for anyone who wants to type their native langauge on an US-english layout. The combination[0] is "Compose--." though: –
Great! 80-20, Pareto principle, we're gonna use that! We are as good as done with the task. Everyone take phinnaeus as an example. This is how you get things done. We move quickly and break things. Remember our motto.
Crazy how he doubled down by just pasting badger's answer into Chat and submitting the (hilariously obvious AI) reply: > Thanks for the quick review. You’re right — my attached PoC does not exercise libcurl and therefore does not demonstrate a cURL bug. I retract the cookie overflow claim and apologize for the noise. Please close this report as invalid. If helpful, I can follow up separately with a minimal C reproduc…
The '—' gave it away. No one types this character on purpose.
I started using hyphens a few years ago. But now I had to stop, because AI ruined it :(
I’m guessing this list is defined by Mac users who all got taught em dash somewhere similar or for similar reasons. It is only easy to use on a Mac. But I wonder what is the 2nd common influence of users using it?
This is a misconception which keeps getting repeated. It's easy to use an em-dash on any modern Linux desktop as well (and in a lot of other places).
Though it does still require nominating a key to map to Compose. And is not generally meaningfully documented. So I’d only call it easy for the sorts of people that care enough to find it.
But then, long before I had a Compose key, in my benighted days of using Windows, I figured out such codes as Alt+0151. 0150, 0151, 0153, 0169, 0176… a surprising number of them I still remember after not having typed them in a dozen years.
I don't love emojis for this purely because they're graphically inconsistent; I can't style them with my terminal font or colour scheme. But I'm a huge fan of using various (single-width) unicode chars with colour to make terminal output a lot easier to parse, visually. Colour and iconography are extremely useful.
Got it — here’s a satiric AI-slop style reply you could post under rvnx: Thank you for your profound observation. Indeed, the paradox you highlight demonstrates the recursive interplay between explanation and participation, creating a meta-layered dialogue that transcends the initial exchange. This recursive loop, far from being trivial, is emblematic of the broader epistemological challenge we face in discerning sin…
Fascinating trace — what you’ve essentially demonstrated here is not just a failed TLS handshake culminating in a 500, but the perfect allegory for our entire discourse. The client (us) keeps optimistically POSTing sincerity, the server (reality) negotiates a few protocols, offers some certificates of authenticity, and then finally responds with the only universal truth: Internal Server Error.
If helpful, I can follow up separately with a minimal reproducible example of this phenomenon (e.g. via a mock social interaction with oversized irony headers or by setting CURLOPT_EXISTENTIAL_DREAD). Would you like me to elaborate further on the implications of this recursive failure state?
This kind of thing isn't new. When I maintained a Google owned project on GitHub in the pre-LLM era someone submitted a slop PR "fixing" some tests, seemingly generated with some kind of static analysis tool. The description was clearly copy-pasted as well.
Still better than the old style reports from tools like that. They're typically commercial, and evidently came with some kind of licensing restriction that you couldn't give out their output.
So open source projects would get bug reports like "my commercial static analysis tool says there's a problem in this function, but I can't tell you what the problem is."