• 4 Posts
  • 1.15K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: March 31st, 2025

help-circle


  • Yeah, it’s my own little category that I have in my mind, not anything super formalized. But there’s a bunch of immigration content that depicts some kind of hyper idealized life in another country where they’re like, oh, I have this beautiful house. It’s so affordable. Everything is so great. And then you start to ask yourself, well, how do they actually have a visa? What are they doing for their job? How far do they have to travel for their job? How does any of this work? And then you see that either that a spouse is doing actually just a pretty normal job, or they themselves have some unicorn job, and the whole setup is really quite a rare/specific one. I don’t think that they’re outright lying or anything, but they just aren’t telling the whole story much like the magician






  • mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.detoProgrammer Humor@programming.devDo not use ai
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    19 days ago

    Every AI-forward dev I know is worse at their job than the ones who don’t like it. They all think they’re doing something smart, but their output sucks and they end up being deadweight that people who actually think and work have to carry. Maybe its not that way everywhere, but it is undeniably the reality at my employer.









  • I agree. This is how he meant it and how anyone who likes him takes it. It makes him likeable to those people. It’s so childish to pretend it isn’t.

    These types of “news” articles I think are actually quite dangerous. It shifts the battleground into weaker territory. If you’re a prosecutor trying to prove a guy needs a life sentence, and you have thirty testimonies of him beating puppies with hammers, why would you pull up to court saying shit like “your honor, the defendant’s cologne is too sharp and clearly in poor taste”? Meanwhile everyone who justifiably hates the puppy-flattener is excited to jump on ANY bandwagon to hate the guy, no matter how flimsy it is. Next thing you know the court is all talking about his cologne. Then the defendant comes in with some actually good explanation for that like “they didn’t have my regular cologne in prison” and now it looks like maybe the prosecution was wrong about him. The flimsy bandwagon falls apart.

    I’ve said it before on here:

    We MUST resist the urge to criticize bad people for weak reasons when they already provide us with stronger arguments against themselves.