CompassRed

joined 2 years ago
[–] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

You don't get to tell me what I mean when I speak. Regimes, revolutions, and states are all different things and I would never use one of those terms to mean another. There's no point in arguing with people lacking even the most basic understanding of politics.

[–] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 1 week ago (3 children)

No. That's not what happened. I rejected the idea that having a violent revolution makes a regime violent by definition. This whole time I've been talking about regimes and you've been talking about revolutions. It's really that simple of a miscommunication.

[–] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 1 week ago (5 children)

No. I explicitly rejected that interpretation in the very comment you are responding to. Can you read?

[–] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

It's not relevant to this thread. Why doesn't anyone here know their basic vocabulary?

[–] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Who cares? I'm not talking about how they get solidified. I'm talking about what they do when they have power. If someone supports violent left wing regimes, then they are a Tankie. If you don't think that the regimes are violent beyond their revolutions, then that wouldn't imply one way or another whether you are a Tankie.

[–] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 1 week ago (12 children)

No one said anything about revolution.

[–] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 week ago (15 children)

A tankie is anyone who supports violent left wing regimes. It requires support of violence and doesn't require that the regime still exists.

[–] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 months ago

Must just be a skill issue.

[–] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Good thing that's not the case then.

[–] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 2 months ago

It's not about stupid or smart. It's a tool, not a person. If you don't get the same results that other people get with the same tool, then what could possibly be the problem other than how the person is using the tool?

[–] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 2 months ago (4 children)

No, it's not. It doesn't have intention. It's literally just a tool. If you don't get the results you expect with a tool when other people do get those results, then the problem isn't the tool.

[–] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 months ago (9 children)

The symptoms you describe are caused by bad prompting. If an AI is providing over-complicated solutions, 9 times out of 10 it's because you didn't constrain your problem enough. If it's referencing tools that don't exist, then you either haven't specified which tools are acceptable or you haven't provided the context required for it to find the tools. You may also be wanting too much out of AI. You can't expect it to do everything for you. You still have to do almost all the thinking and engineering if you want a quality project - the AI is just there to write the code. Sure, you can use an AI to help you learn how to be a better engineer, but AIs typically don't make good high-level decisions. Treat AI like an intern, not like a principal engineer.

view more: next ›