Of course, if you use AI, it's very hard to know the sources used for training that went into the output you just got.
15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram
241–250 of 427 posts
Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram
#242Microsoft employee (VP of something or other, for whatever Microsoft uses "VP" to mean) doing damage control on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/scott.hanselman.com/post/3mez4yxty2... > looks like a vendor, and we have a group now doing a post-mortem trying to figure out how it happened. It'll be removed ASAFP > Understood. Not trying to sweep under rugs, but I also want to point out that everything is moving very f…
> "everything is moving very fast" Then slow down. With this objective lack or control, sooner or later your LLM experiments in production will drive into a wall instead of hitting a little pothole like this diagram.
- Put on your seatbelts, man!
- I can't, moving too fast!
Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram
#243Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can be beneficial if there is no mechanism that ensures that develop is always in a working state, but there is one that ensures that master is. The immediate benefit is that a new feature branch can always be started off master from a known-good state. Of course, there are ways to enforce a known-good state on master without a dedicated develop branch, but it can be easier when having the two branches. (I just di…
Prod deployments usually have a tag associated
[deleted]
Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram
#244I had to look up what "morged" meant, it's either morph and merge or a youtuber. I'm going with the first.
I can't find a link to the learn page so can only see what's on the article. Is this a real big deal? Genuine question, driveby downvote if you must.
Even if this was a product of AI surely it's just a case of fessing up and citing the source? Yeah it doesn't look good for MS but it's hardly the end of the world considering how much shit AI has ripped off... I might be missing something.
Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In either case -- no review process, or a failed review process -- the failure is definitionally systemic. Ortho and grammar errors should have been corrected, but do you really expect a review process to identify that a diagram is a copy from another one some rando already published on the internet years ago?
Shouldn't "where are we sourcing our content" be part of any publication review process?
The Large Laundering Machine, sorry, I mean the Large Language Model! Provenance? Where's that?
Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram
#246Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can be beneficial if there is no mechanism that ensures that develop is always in a working state, but there is one that ensures that master is. The immediate benefit is that a new feature branch can always be started off master from a known-good state. Of course, there are ways to enforce a known-good state on master without a dedicated develop branch, but it can be easier when having the two branches. (I just di…
Prod deployments usually have a tag associated
Prod deployment isn’t the same as known-good. The latter can be “passes all automated quality controls”; that doesn’t automatically mean that it’ll be deployed. Release/deploy cadences can be much slower than merge-into-master, and usually depend on actual feature (set) completion.
Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram
#247Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow it’s even worse than I thought. I thought that convictungly morhing would be the only problem. The nonsense and inconsistent arrowheads, the missing annotations, the missing bubbles. The “tirm” axis… That this was ever published shows a supreme lack of care.
The turn axis is great! Not only have they invented their own letter (it's not r, or n, or m, but one more than m!), it points the wrong way.
It's like the Pokémon evolution of n through m, we need to notify the Unicode Consortium.
Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram
#248> Is there even a goal here beyond "generating content"? This is the part that hurts. It's all so pointless, so perfunctory. A web of incentives run amok. Systems too slick to stop moving. Is this what living inside the paperclip maximizer feels like? Words we didn't write, thoughts we didn't have, for engagement, for a media presence, for an audience you can peddle yourself to when your bullshit job gets automated.…
Acceleranco is looking rather prescient right now.
Fall or Dodge in Hell too
Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram
#249LinkedIn is also a great example of this stuff at the moment. Every day I see posts where someone clearly took a slide or a diagram from somewhere, then had ChatGPT "make it better" and write text for them to post along with it. Words get mangled, charts no longer make sense, but these people clearly aren't reading anything they're posting. It's not like LinkedIn was great before, but the business-influencer incentiv…
Yeah I've been collecting some of the weirdest ones I've seen floating by. It's really the only thing that has me visiting linkedin. https://www.marginalia.nu/junk/linked/games.jpeg https://www.marginalia.nu/junk/linked/json.png https://www.marginalia.nu/junk/linked/syntax.png (and before anyone tells me to charge my phone, I have one of those construction worker phones with 2 weeks battery. 14% is like good for a co…
The red apple streams one is good. It shows how developers chase shiny new stuff with no respect for fundamentals. They will say it's less code, and then show you more code.
Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram
#250I had to look up what "morged" meant, it's either morph and merge or a youtuber. I'm going with the first. I can't find a link to the learn page so can only see what's on the article. Is this a real big deal? Genuine question, driveby downvote if you must. Even if this was a product of AI surely it's just a case of fessing up and citing the source? Yeah it doesn't look good for MS but it's hardly the end of the world…
It's indicative of how little Microsoft cares in addition to the issue of plagiarism. Which shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who's had to read Microsoft documentation recently.