Funny timing. I’ve been building an LSP for a niche DSL I use at work. I’ve been using tree-sitter to build out the AST of sorts for the LSP functions, but just yesterday it dawned on me that the syntax highlighting my LSP does is all just TS queries and encoding them properly for the protocol. So I was looking into if that can be done in the vscode extension that provides the LSP hookup instead. Kinda nice that the same tree-sitter grammar can be used across the extension and LSP, even tho they’re in different languages.
When I saw the trailer in my YouTube feed I immediately thought it was an ad for those trash mobile games. Watching it didn’t really change my opinion either. I don’t actually want that to come across in a disparaging way - but it was just the vibes it gave off.
I’d save a lot of time from not choosing to smugly telling the AI how wrong it was just for my own reassurances that at least for now I’m still more useful than it is.
Jokes aside, my English is passable and I'm fine with it when writing comments but I'm very aware that some of it doesn't sound native due to me, well, not being native speaker.
I use AI to make it sound more fluent when writing for my blog.
As long as your bullet points+prompt are shorter than the output, couldn't you post that instead? The only time I think an LLM might be ethically acceptable for something a human has to read is if you ask it to make it shorter.
Well, actually, what if my own words make me come across as a raging pedantic asshole, you feckless moron!? I don't actually think you're a feckless moron, but sometimes I'll get emotional about this or that, and run my words through an LLM to reword it so that "it's not assholey, it's nice". I may know better than to use the phrase "well actually" seriously these days, but when the point is effective communication, yeah I don't want my readers to be put off by AI-isms, but I also don't want them to get put off by my words being assholey or condescending or too snarky or smug or any number of things that detract from my point. And fwiw, I didn't run this comment through an LLM.
It is a fun bootstrapping problem. How do you firewall enough dedicated resources to stand up your infrastructure if you dogfood your own product. Probably insidiously easy to have a dependency on the production service.
Fares end up being a trade off between service area and ridership. Eliminating fares tends to mean cuts to service for the same budget, so your service area would drop. Alternatively, having fares will allow for some more service, to cover more area but some people might not ride. Becomes dependent then on the goals of the transit system.
reply