Earlier quoted context omitted.
Recent research has shown that specs actually degrade output, so I’m more inclined to think you’ve got the slot machine mentality mentioned up-thread.
Source? Last I checked, specs improved output quality. There are hiccups with complex, difficult specs but I guess that much is obvious.
I'm helping my dog vibe code games
401–404 of 404 posts
Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games
#402Selfh.st writer said this guy was the dev for Huntarr repo crash out.
/s
Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games
#403The buried insight is right: if random keystrokes produce playable games, the input is basically noise and the system is doing all the work. We've evolved past the point where intent matters. That's either the most exciting or most terrifying thing about where this is all heading. But I am glad I am sitting in the front row watching this all happen, especially a dog vibe code!
> if random keystrokes produce playable games, the input is basically noise and the system is doing all the work
I mean not really, because the value in games isn't that they exist, but they are fun and interesting to play, because a human has come up with an innovative idea and a vision for executing it.
Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games
#404Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this is more of a statement of human behavior under uncertainty and non-determinism rather than the tools themselves. Perhaps the ease of use brings it closer to the funny analogy you made but I think you will find this in any system where users interact with a partially opaque mechanism that produces different quality outcomes contingent on their input...
Sorry, this can't be anything but an intentionally obfuscating comment that I need to call out. > more of a statement of human behavior under uncertainty and non-determinism rather than the tools themselves. This is basically saying "It's not gambling, it's just the psychological underpinnings that form the foundation of all gambling enterprises". Who cares to split this difference other than casino owners?
I was not actually defending LLM tools or casinos. Not every system with variable outcomes and ritualized user behavior is meaningfully equivalent to wagering money against probabilistic loss (slots). If the same reasoning were applied to video games or running scientific experiments of any kind, we'd end up labeling most uncertainty-laden interaction as gambling. I just did not find it particular enough.