And ironically enough they have more in common with the Persian “soldiers” which are just fodder for their God King.

The syntax strikes me as a little clunky, but I do like the idea. Coming from Python I’ve used generators a lot (which in my obviously biased opinion is a clearer name that “iterator” here) so recognise the value in having something like that in the language.

Same. Whenever I see messages like his it just smacks of denial / coping strategies. “It’s all those promiscuous women’s fault I can’t get a girlfriend” fuckin grow up.

“Get your evidence away from my beliefs”

This is just provably untrue. You might have more relationship-weighted encounters off-app, but to say that it’s unhelpful if you don’t want a relationship is false.

I used to know a guy who worked oil rigs I think six months of the year, earned a ton, then spent his off six months playing EVE Constantly. I think that might be close to the optimal way to play tbh.

Excellent suggestion - it’s much better.

Trigger warning: r*ddit link

Same feelings / background here. Navigation will take me a little to grok, but I’m liking it so far.

Why would it be illegal? It’s shitty and it’s obvious what they’re trying to do, but I can’t fathom what law from any jurisdiction this would violate.

That side of it I wholeheartedly agree with. Perhaps I’m just deluding myself into thinking technology awareness early on makes for better legal infrastructure to handle its effect on society. I really would like that to be the case.

But yeah agree, “ChatGPT” being synonymous with “groundbreaking AI” to the vast majority of the public (I suspect) is not great from a monopoly perspective.

On the politicians / rulemakers side of things, that may or may not be a good thing tbh. Technology moves so fast and traditionally the aforementioned groups are glacial and can’t keep up, sometimes to the benefit of a small group, often to the detriment of the majority. Having this on their radar relelatively soon is potentially a useful change.