- I see this sentiment and rationalization a lot but I don't understand it.
Age aside, presently, are you saying you cannot meet a threshold you would label competitive? Competitive games are almost always played on a spectrum? I would argue your placement in the spectrum should curate the ground for competition if the player base is large enough (and ladder system coherent).
Now with my framing understood, how does age fit in? I can buy that as you age you have less time to put into a game and potentially weaker reflexes (I'm not going to pretend to know the science here), but this should simply inform your placement on the ladder?
I don't think it has anything to do with "people who play 6 hours a day and are in their peak twitch-reflex years" unless you mean your enjoyment is derived from overcoming this archetype.
- I hear this more and more as I age. This isn't what original comment was doing, but when discussing recent readings or hobbies with my friends or community I often must prod for the actual object of their pass-time or sit through a winded preface devaluing their enjoyment. It saddens me that people can so easily betray their own experiences.
- Can you provide the specific research you are referring to?
- It seems more odd to me you are placing as much value on career agency to infer ones mental health broadly. I'm not saying this isnt a norm in many cultures, but I'd like to hear your argument for supporting it.
- Can you speak on what features were missing ootb and which plugins respectively gave you trouble? I'm not sure how "people who are doing Rust stuff" would specifically get more out of it either? Are you implying you cant just use the tool/plugins without familiarity in Rust? This is not my experience.
- If you look at the site in question closer, it states that the "green, blue, and red bars" mean "constructive, technical, and flame war".
If I had to guess, you likely have some heavy premises that blind you from engaging with the content of a post. I'm not going to pretend there isn't some truth in your premises, however I would imagine there would be "many significant issues with [any] community" if we all operated this carelessly.
- This rhetoric worries me. If you insist on degrading others at least fix it to something like:
> [They seemingly] can't think on their own without an AI [moderating]
They _literally_ can think on their own, and they _literally_ did think up a handful of prompts.
A more constructive way to make what I assume to be your point would be highlighting why this shift is meaningful and leaving the appeal to ego for yourself.
- Well put and thank you for adding much depth here!
- It isn't clear what you said.
You asserted a pattern of conduct on the user simonw:
> I think constantly replying to everybody with some link which doesn't address their concerns
Then claimed that conduct was:
> condescending and disrespectful.
I am asking you to elaborate to whom simonw is condescending and disrespecting. I don't see how it follows.
- Condescending and disrespectful to whom? Everybody wholsale? This doesnt seem reasonable? Please elaborate.
- Maybe I'm still doing some heavy priming by using multiple prompts, but similarly you can follow-up any speculative prompt with a "now flip the framing to x" query to ensure you are seeing the strong cases from various perspectives. You must be honest with yourself in evaluating the meaningful substance between the two, but I've found there often is something to parse. And the priming I suggested is easily auditable anyhow: just reverse the prompt order and now you have even more (often junk) to parse!
- I'm guessing the broader demographic of users simply don't think the software is crap. My buddy working in water transportation was just raving about Teams to me the other day. His praise basically boiled down to being integrated with his organization, providing him easy access to his department-resources. I suppose it does serve my buddy well.
- If you were sincere in your attempt to "empathize with [them] there", your prose screams the opposite. I point this out, as anecdotally, it was quite distracting from the rest of your point and makes me think you are not doing much to meet the other perspective.
Now to directly push on your perspective, I'm not so sure why you make the conclusion that you don't have opportunity for feedback given you've moved to a remote office culture. I am giving you a form of feedback in this instance. Yes it is at my whim and not guaranteed if our interests don't align, however this is a cost of collaboration. It is a bit grim to see the ushering of "coding LLM" as proper replacement here, when you are doing no-more than bootstrapping introspection. This isn't to detract from the value you've found in the tool, I only question why you've written off the collaboration element of unique human experiences interlocking on common ground.
- They were likely pushing back on the original comment, such that it isn't solely:
> ...those who decide about how your time is being used...
which stops individuals from:
> [spending] more time thinking, writing, playing piano, and taking walks — with other people.
Which it seems you would agree with. I don't see where they asserted whether this was a problem to address.
- Thank you for sharing this. :(
- Sorry to confuse the thread. I meant to point to the original comment (embedding-shape), but blindly labeled them GP.
We share understanding of their analogy, but differ in the inferred application. I took it as the well fed turkeys are "developers who deny AI will disrupt their industry", not "developers" as a whole.
- If you read the grand parent, they seem to be denying a disruption is taking place industry wide. The adage was used to illustrate how complacency is blinded by the very conditions that enable it, and while this is unfalsifiable and not very conducive to discussion, "fear mongering" is a bit rich to levy.
Further:
> Our industry is being disrupted by AI... No wholesale turkey slaughter.
Is an entirely different position than the GP who is essentially betting on AI producing more jobs for hackers, which surely won't be so simple.
- I'm sure, given the means, the Turkey could have written some convincing prose about their delicious fatty meal.
While I appreciate you leaving the value of competitiveness in the air... on the other hand, by defining it so purely, you've essentially resigned yourself from participating.
I'm curious what games have molded this perspective.