221–230 of 277 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They removed the global shortcut to show a portable chat overlay. That one entrypoint must've been the source of at least 80% of my chats, yet apparently it was considered too vestigial to keep.
Can it be reassigned under Settings / Keyboard shortcuts?
I wonder if this says anything about the capabilities of AI. If it's better to bundle an entire headless office suite than ask your AI to build support for relatively well documented formats (or even to extract the file support parts it needs from Libra Office), that seems to suggest AI isn't as good as human devs just yet.
Or, it's dumb as hell to have an AI re-write Word every time it wants to output or present a document. But let's focus on how this validates the belief that "AI bad."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's not possible with humans in a relatively SHORT amount of time (let's say 1 year).
I’m not sure about you but I would not want to adopt and ship an overnight “word” written in rust
And big AI LABs, with basically infinite tokens, are the only one in the position to do it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Windows has never felt more archaic than now. I can't imagine trying to do work on a Windows machine in the age of LLMs. If there is anything that LLMs are rock solid at these days, it's unix terminal usage.
They're also great at powershell, you just need to tell it to do so. sh is neat but it's 55 years old, there are newer and better shell environment concepts out there and the robots can handle them well too, try it some time!
Try starting from a blank slate Windows machine and making a commitment to only changing settings via PowerShell, and ideally only declaring them using DSC. You'll soon discover settings where the best you can do is snapshot the registry, change a setting in the GUI, snapshot the registry again, then take a diff so you can write the registry change into your PowerShell automation. If you're on a corporate machine, you'll also likely find many corners of PowerShell that you need closed off to you, anyway.
At the end of the day, Windows is not friendly to automation because it's not CLI-first (not culturally and not technically).
The new app is an unbelievable mess. Settings are senselessly organized, too. The whole thing has this aesthetic slickness and then underneath it's like the people who make it have never even used it. It's not surprising that it's pulled in absolutely massive dependencies, although I'm not sure it's the wrong call on some operating systems. LibreOffice is pretty tried and true.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
More like, don't expect anything if not forced. Most people only generally pay for things if there is no other option. It's about what's moral (even then debatable as everyone has different morals) versus what's realistic to expect.
The Guardian's funding model [0] proves this wrong. People will absolutely pay for things voluntarily if you ask them, without forcing them to. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/membership/2018/nov/12/katharine... In a nutshell - voluntary funding by readership. No paywall. You can read as many stories as you like for free, and donate if you want. It works.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree that it would be the right thing to do. Which is why you have to make the best attempt to make it the legal thing, because people looking to make money will not care about what's right. So, it makes sense to point out the disconnect when people use and promote pro-corporate licenses and then get upset when corporates follow them to the letter and provide them nothing but demands in return. If you want a mutua…
> because people looking to make money will not care about what's right This is two-sided: making a kind of license mandatory also shrinks adoption if it is more restrictive. So, even if I acknowledge there is truth in your side of the story, there is also another at the other side, as usual. How many people use GPL-licensed software as opposed to MIT licensed?
Regardless, who cares about "adoption?" That's not the original point of open source which was that if you're working on something and you wanted to share it, you could, without any expectation of usage, merely that it might help just one extra person out there. It's simply human ego to care about adoption and GitHub usage and stars especially have accelerated this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not sure about you but I would not want to adopt and ship an overnight “word” written in rust
Me neither, but this is exactly my point: nowadays, no one will trust an "overnight word written in rust", unless someone prove that an "overnight word written in rust" is good enough. And big AI LABs, with basically infinite tokens, are the only one in the position to do it.
Right now even OpenAI has its own copy of Overleaf (for latex). I’m not in the same circles as it’s intended users, though I haven’t heard any major use of it since the splash.
Would be nice if they donate to LibreOffice then, to improve the support of various MS Office features in files, as well as comparison/diffing features. Win-win to everyone.
Someone may need to explain to me what is wrong with this sorry. Is it because it bloats the app with functionality that some users will never use? I feel like that is fairly usual for productivity/business apps generally.
I don't see anything wrong with it, I just think it's interesting.