OpenAI didn’t merely fill its latest $6.5 billion funding round — it’s oversubscribed! OpenAI is now deciding which investors are gullible cool and handsome enough to be allowed to give them money…
Your comment dissing the article penned by the de facto mod of this instance is around 2 times as long as the article itself. And no offense, dgerard has probably been writing on the internet for longer than you’ve been alive.
Is that literal appeal to authority supposed to make me respectful? I don’t care what this article is like, whether you’d vouch for it or not, I still won’t read the majority of articles linked to, anywhere.
I stand by my judgment of the medium, I think it’s at a serious low point.
(I notice I’ve written “roughly three years” when the article was talking about a few thousand days, not a thousand days. I missed that bit. I went on a bit too much of a tangent about consciousness, and I had some grammar/spelling errors. (Still a fan of swype typing, but it has been an issue.))
The reason I wrote what I wrote is mostly a response to the idea that you should always read the linked article. I just don’t fucking agree, and I’m deeply disappointed in how generally bad the writing profession has become. It’s easier than it’s ever been to become a published author and a professional writer for a paper/magazine/website, and it shows. This crowded mess of garbage bothers me enough to compel me to write that kind of reply.
…
But I looked up this Gerard guy, seems he’s mostly known as a critic of crypto grifters. At least we agree on that.
I don’t know if I’ll bother reading his article, make an exception. If you think it’s exceptional, then maybe.
Your comment dissing the article penned by the de facto mod of this instance is around 2 times as long as the article itself. And no offense, dgerard has probably been writing on the internet for longer than you’ve been alive.
Is that literal appeal to authority supposed to make me respectful? I don’t care what this article is like, whether you’d vouch for it or not, I still won’t read the majority of articles linked to, anywhere.
I stand by my judgment of the medium, I think it’s at a serious low point.
(I notice I’ve written “roughly three years” when the article was talking about a few thousand days, not a thousand days. I missed that bit. I went on a bit too much of a tangent about consciousness, and I had some grammar/spelling errors. (Still a fan of swype typing, but it has been an issue.))
The reason I wrote what I wrote is mostly a response to the idea that you should always read the linked article. I just don’t fucking agree, and I’m deeply disappointed in how generally bad the writing profession has become. It’s easier than it’s ever been to become a published author and a professional writer for a paper/magazine/website, and it shows. This crowded mess of garbage bothers me enough to compel me to write that kind of reply.
…
But I looked up this Gerard guy, seems he’s mostly known as a critic of crypto grifters. At least we agree on that.
I don’t know if I’ll bother reading his article, make an exception. If you think it’s exceptional, then maybe.