For a community that prides itself on depth of conversation, ideas, etc. I'm surprised to so much praise for a post like this. I'll be the skeptic. What does it bring to you to vibe code your vibe shelf?
To me, this project perfectly encapsulates the uselessness of AI, small projects like this are good learning or relearning experience and by outsourcing your thinking to AI you deprive yourself of any learning, ownership, or the self fulfillment that comes with it. Unless, of course, you think engaging in "tedious" activities with things you enjoy have zero value, and if getting lost in the weeds isn't the whole point. Perhaps in one of those books you didn't read, you missed a lesson about the journey being more important than the destination, but idk I'm more of a film person.
The only piece of wisdom here is the final sentence:
I don't think you fully understood the purpose of the project. He wanted an end product (the bookshelf app) that he had been putting off due to the time commitment. He did not say he wanted to learn about how to program in general, nor did he even say he liked programming. People care about results and the end product. If you like to program as a hobby, LLMs in no way stop you from doing this. At the end of the day, people with your viewpoint fall short of convincing people against using AI because you are being extremely condescending to the desires of regular people. Also, it is quite ironic that you attempted to make a point about him not reading all 500 books on his bookshelf, yet you don't seem to have read (or understood) the opening section of the post.
I'm not trying to _convince_ a stranger on the internet whether to use AI for their vibe shelf hobby project; I'm engaging with a project being presented by it's creator. Interesting that you think continuing to use AI is some enormous own against my presumed attempt at persuasion. Sounds like maybe you're the one needing validation for your viewpoint. It's clearly easy to achieve such validation given the evidence in this comment section so, I'm not sure why you're seeking it from me.
As for the main concern in your comment, I did in fact read the blog post; see how I quoted multiple parts, verbatim ("word for word")?. I now understand this audience may not be entirely familiar with literature or reading beyond basic instructions from their preferred datacenter or advertising company, but generally the beginning of a piece of writing (the "introduction") serves as the premise while the end (the "conclusion") describes the abstract ideas a reader should take away from the entire piece. I'll even let you in on a little secret: the word "conclusion" is synonymous with "a judgement following logical steps". As I mentioned in my original comment there is also a middle section which can often be more important or meaningful (to both characters and readers) than the introduction or conclusion. Howver, in this piece of writing it amounted to "I didn't know how to do something so I asked AI and when it didn't do the right thing I asked it again" which isn't a very engaging story (there's a similar famous premise about an "oracle" that can respond to three "queries", however the entertainment relies on this limitation). Anyways, the badic premise seems to be well received already and lacking any interesting description of the process, I chose to engage with the conclusion. The question of taste.
The author believes, or rather instructed an LLM to generate an article from the perspective in which someone belives, generative AI can enable the good taste of someone in prototype hell to come to fruition. But in my original comment I'm making the point that creating something of good taste is inextricably linked to engagement with the medium. But the author shows a willful lack of engagement, with their medium whether that be software or a book shelf.
If you'd like to engage with my original comment in good faith, here are some questions:
* do you really think this project constitutes good taste? for software? for book shelves?
* can someone with an apathy for a craft as extreme the author have good taste?
* might this even be considered bad taste given the technological sensibilities of this forum? (disdain for js bloat, foss, "elegant solutions")
Since you said you read the post, explain this to me:
>To me, this project perfectly encapsulates the uselessness of AI, small projects like this are good learning or relearning experience and by outsourcing your thinking to AI you deprive yourself of any learning, ownership, or the self fulfillment that comes with it. Unless, of course, you think engaging in "tedious" activities with things you enjoy have zero value, and if getting lost in the weeds isn't the whole point.
In the context of his first paragraph
>I own more books than I can read. Not in a charming, aspirational way, but in the practical sense that at some point I stopped knowing what I owned. Somewhere around 500 books, memory stopped being a reliable catalog.[...] For years, I told myself I would fix this. Nothing elaborate, nothing worthy of a startup idea. A spreadsheet would have been enough. I never did it, not because it was hard, but because it was tedious.
Wouldn't your statement be completely moot because he plainly said the purpose of the project was to create a system to handle his books, and the only reason he hasn't done it yet was because it was tedious? (Hint: if you need the paragraph or thge rest of his article to be broken down for you more, I suggest asking ChatGPT to give a summary for you).
> We want to start creating a developmental story and start understanding whether the things that we’re seeing are the root of autism or a neurological consequence of having had autism your whole life
Yeah, how many studies are done a year? Random chance is the #1 explanation with that small of a sample size. It doesn't take a degree in stats say that the next thing that needs to be done is to replicate the study a few times before making any claims or searching for any publicity. This subject is so emotional for the families involved that publicizing without more confirmation is a bit irresponsible especially if it is easy to do follow-up studies.
Agreed. Publish, but don't publicize. My remarks were aimed at the article, not the paper. This sounds like a promising, very initial, study that needs a lot more data before making claims about having found anything. Qualified headlines like 'Early study hints at..' Or 'Initial research potentially shows a promising....' would be better but even then a study with this little data should be very cautiously approached by any type of science reporting. More than mentioning it in passing as promising is probably not warranted until the n value is a lot higher and involves other teams and other methods.
This sounds like an intellectual debate but there's nothing of substance being said here lol. casey2 thinks British people today are wrongly (naively) complaining about the rich/powerful/elite (structuralism). top1bobby is making fun of casey2 because the latter is using a lot of big words (overwrought) while _reducing_ complicated politics to a single issue; basically "you think you're smart with fancy words but you are just as bad as the people you complain about (P.S. I can use fancy words too)"
I saw that one in the comments section, and I pretty much only agree with the last sentence. We should probably make more human-friendly architecture. However, the rest of the article reeks of eugenics. "Giving input to people who deviate from the norm harms our society". Ironically, that's actually what was bad about Le Corbusier, he was an architectural fascist. It wasn't that his mind processed visual stimuli differently, it's that he hated the way other people saw things. Here's some quotes from "The City of Tomorrow":
"There is only one right angle; but there is an infinityde of other angles. The right angle, therefore, has superior rights over other angles; it is unique and it is constant"
s/right/white/ and s/angle/race/ and you probably have a direct quote from Hitler.
"things which come into close contact with the body, are of a less pure geometry"
You don't have to go around trying to give fake diagnoses to Le Corbusier to find where things went wrong. You just have to listen!
My devil's advocate take on this article is that they're using Rust as scapegoat to their scaling (team not performance) problems. I use Go at $DAYJOB and we're having similar problems for lead times. OTOH, the novelty of Rust in webdev, means there isn't someone to make a decision like, "we don't need performance, so use threads instead of async and pass everything around in a box". I've sunk plenty of personal time trying to wrangle async on a CRUD app for learning, and I recommend it as an exercise, but I'd avoid async if I was trying to ship something.
> Based on the cheapest instance that matches my own PC's specs
I wonder how much comoute and ram you need for the routing part.
When I worked on a maps stack (no routing and cloud) we would only provision a big compute instance for importing data and seeding (pre-caching) the new tiles. The server itself could be less powerful, though you might have to pay extra for more hard drive space.
Looks like it was deleted. From the wayback machine:
Hi All,
We all knew that this day was coming. The day where Ethereum FINALLY merges into Proof of Stake after years of development and delay. As a result, Ethereum can no longer be mined. This is a devastating blow to the mining community as a whole and signals that /r/GPUMining and the corresponding discord server are ready to be shut down.
Yes, there are still coins out there that are minable. Go ahead and go for it, but most of them pose an extremely high risk and the moderators aren't comfortable keeping this subreddit going knowing that it will be used as a platform used to shill and push scamcoins. People already do push shill and scamcoins in this subreddit and discord, but the moderators have done an excellent job of filtering out the obvious shills.
We will keep this subreddit viewable, but we will no longer allow new posts. The discord server will be soon deleted and only /r/gpumining will remain in read-only mode.
While /r/GPUMining will be over, we still encourage you to get involved in crypto communities, join teams, and help push this technology forward to benefit the greater good.
We hope you got in early and made your bag before it was too late.
Thank you for all of the fun through the ups and the downs. We'll see you all around soon!
> I started asking for things I did not need.
For a community that prides itself on depth of conversation, ideas, etc. I'm surprised to so much praise for a post like this. I'll be the skeptic. What does it bring to you to vibe code your vibe shelf?
To me, this project perfectly encapsulates the uselessness of AI, small projects like this are good learning or relearning experience and by outsourcing your thinking to AI you deprive yourself of any learning, ownership, or the self fulfillment that comes with it. Unless, of course, you think engaging in "tedious" activities with things you enjoy have zero value, and if getting lost in the weeds isn't the whole point. Perhaps in one of those books you didn't read, you missed a lesson about the journey being more important than the destination, but idk I'm more of a film person.
The only piece of wisdom here is the final sentence:
> Taste still does not [get cheaper].
Though, only in irony.
reply