For his defense, the business is really 1M$ and he really started in his dorm room. So clickbaity but factually true, unlike many other clickbaity stories out there.

Funniest comment in this thread :-D

Nice writeup. A practical example of a project, what was found, how it was found, the quality of the findings, reproducible.

Yes, it's more an infinite cylinder.

"VSCode Sadbox" -- pun intended or not, that's funny :-)

No.

All watermarks are cures that are worse than the diseases they are trying to prevent (and never achieved to even cure anything).

Watermark is a blatant violation of legitimate privacy expectations, while not preventing anything because they can be easily removed.

So all the honest usages are punished, while illegitimate ones are not caught.

A water mark that identifies you personally is a different prospect than one that merely identifies the image as AI generated.

I am with you on opposing a watermark that identifies a person.

I am not with you in saying all watermarks are a violation of privacy or that they result in punishment of honest use. I don’t see how those follow.

According to "experts", you have to suffer to make good art. She used a tool that reduced that suffering phase, so she's "garbage" now.

I don't know about AI, but I think the main problem nowadays is that a growing number of people can only deal with binary categories, either it's godly or it's trash.

To conclude, anything that is not written with a stone tablet is garbage.

Amazon books are now heavily infected with AI slop, I've yet to read a book which is detectably AI generated which is not garbage. When that stops being the case, perhaps people will stop objecting to it.

This isn't about suffering vs not, it's about quality vs garbage. If the judges truly couldn't tell though and actually read the book properly, I'd say it's fine to use AI in that sense as the author clearly heavily supervised it or just used it for inspiration and they produced something the judges valued.

Part of the problem with other use-cases is that we have up to now assumed that writing a book took significant effort and therefore do not have controls in place for quality. If it doesn't take significant effort to generate something plausible, all the rules have to change to take that into account.

What if you're a poet and use a rhyming dictionary now and then?

I really wouldn't care.

The best recommendation is "Git Internals" (https://github.com/pluralsight/git-internals-pdf). It teaches you how git works from the internal, and give you absolute confidence and understanding on how the tool works.

I guess it'd take one day of your life to read it, but I think it pays back a lot.

This was indeed one of the sources I read to become a git expert. Git is simple and elegant on the inside. Which you'd never believe if you only studied its UI.

Yeah, this is insane. Show a complete lack of understanding on how the tool works.

Using rsync on git is like hammering a nail with a hammer, but then use a 10 pound stone to hammer the hammer.

Tried both right now.

Tried against a 84K loc C project. ck took at least 5 minutes to index, but replies are indeed fast. semble indexing (if any) took no noticeable time (except for the first download of HF model, which took a couple seconds), and replied in a couple of seconds.

Unrelated but ck was a pain to install / compile (install instructions do not say you have to lock the build / you have to have latest libc).

Done some work fixing some of these issues. Please do raise issues when you find them and I'll get them fixed! (author)