Compiling to bash seems awesome, but on the other hand I don't think anyone other than the person who wrote it in amber will run a bash file that looks like machine-generated gibberish on their machine.
Getting Riff-Raff as my first joker activates all my dopamine receptors.
That just because I'm a programmer that must mean I'm a master of anything technology related and can totally help out with their niche problems.
"Hey computer guy, how do I search for new channels on my receiver?"
"Hey computer guy, my excel spreadsheet is acting weird"
"My mobile data isn't working. Fix this."
My friend was a programmer and served in the army, people ordered him to go fix a sattelite. He said he has no idea how but they made him try anyways. It didn't work and everyone was disappointed.
Good read, and I think you might want to look at OnlyOffice. It's open source and while it is kindof a shameless Microsoft Office clone, it does seem to support LaTeX when adding equations. Not sure how well it works as I don't use it though. The slides app is pretty decent, the only bone I have to pick with it is that there aren't many animation types and most of them are very basic. Otherwise, might be what you're looking for.
Edit: I just tried it and it seems to work pretty well. Select LaTeX, type your equation, then select professional in the dropdown menu and it'll show the equation.
I still can't understand why Google keeps hyping up Bard and then releasing it at a poor state just to ruin their reputation. First, we had:
Bard 1, which was hyped up to be the ChatGPT successor. It turned out to be really bad.
Bard 2.0, a massive update that was hyped up to make Bard so much better. It turned out to still be pretty bad (but in fairness it was a minor improvement).
Google Gemini, their massive response to GPT 4 that was, on paper, the best LLM in the world. They finally integrated it into Bard last month and... It's still not great. I could not tell an immediate difference between this and the old Bard. Oh, and the videos they used to advertise Gemini Ultra were fake.
I'm not going to armchair analyze a hugely successful company, but from my point of view it really shows how mismanaged Google has been in the past decade. Failed projects upon cancelled projects upon increasingly frustrated employees.
/rant. Anyways, you should consider using Perplexity if you want something with search capabilities, I've had decent success there. Claude is also significantly better than Bard, but they made free usage very limited lately. Might be a good option if you're willing to pay.
Fiiiinally some good news on GameMaker. I honestly don't know what they were thinking with a subscription just to use the engine, their main audience is indie devs that are just starting out so they just chased them away to engines that are free to use like Godot, Unity, Unreal, etc. You can't even export web games in Gamemaker for free unless you upload it to Opera's website.
I briefly used gamemaker 2 and it was a pretty good, polished engine. Shame Opera sabotaged it so much. It was becoming clear that Godot was quickly taking its users, so the timing of this announcement is good.
Surely this means they have plans to fix screenshare audio on Linux, right? ...Right?
downvotes come at a “cost”, whereby if you want to downvote someone you have to reply directly to them with some justification, say minimum number of characters, words, etc.
I think it's the complete opposite. Platforms with downvotes tend to be less toxic because you don't have to reply to insane people to tell them they're wrong, whereas platforms like Twitter get really toxic because you only see the likes, so people tend to get into fights and "ratio" them which actually increases the attention they get and spreads their message to other people.
In general, platforms without upvotes/downvotes tend to be the most toxic imo. Platforms like old-school forums and 4chan are a complete mess because low-effort troll content is as loud as high effort thoughtful ones. It takes one person to de-rail a conversation and get people to fight about something else, but with downvotes included you just lower their visibility. It's basically crowdsourced moderation, and it works relatively well.
As for ways to reduce toxicity, shrug. Moderation is the only thing that really stops it but if you moderate too much then you'll be called out for censoring people too much, and telling them not to get mad is just not going to happen.
My idea for less toxicity is having better filtering options for things people want to see. Upon joining a platform it would give easy options to filter out communities that are political or controversial. That's what I'm doing on Lemmy, I'm here for entertainment, not arguing.
Sure, but keep in mind this is a casual survey. Don't take the results too seriously. Have fun: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MkuZG2MiGj-77PGkuCAM3Btb1_Lb4TFEx8tTZKiOoYI
Do give some credit if you can.
I have. Disappointingly there isn't much difference, the people working in CS have a 9.59 avg while the people that aren't have a 9.61 avg.
There is a difference in people that have used AI gen before. People that have got a 9.70 avg, while people that haven't have a 9.39 avg score. I'll update the post to add this.
The goal isn't really to be a quiz, but rather just to see how susceptible people are to AI generated art. Many of the images I chose are intentionally vague, 80% of people so far got the line art sketch wrong, and that's with knowing that many of these are AI generated. The results are definitely interesting to see.
A "don't know" option would ruin the point since most people would just choose that. I want to see where people lean towards.
Web development feels like it's stuck in the early 2000's. I've ranted a lot about it over the years but I just don't know how everyone is okay with it. I'm sure tons of people will disagree.
HTML is bad. The language itself feels unintuitive and is clunky compared to modern markdown languages, and let's be honest, your webpage just consists of nested <div> tags.
CSS is bad. Who knew styling can be so unintuitive and unmanageable? Maybe it made sense 25 years ago, but now it's just terrible. It's very clunkily integrated with HTML too in my opinion. Styling and markdown should be one easier to use language where 50% of it isn't deprecated.
Javascript has been memed to death so I won't even go there. Typescript is OK I suppose.
And now for my hottest take: ~10+ years ago I saw web building tools like Wix and I completely expected web development to head in the direction using a GUI to create, style, and script from one interface, even allowing you to create and see dynamic content instantly. I've seen competitors and waited for "the big one" that's actually free and open source and good enough to be used professionally. It never happened. Web dev has just gone backwards and stuck in its old ways, now it's a bloated mess that takes way more time than it deserves.
The Godot engine is actually a pretty good option for creating GUI apps and it's exactly what I envisioned web dev should've been this past decade. One language, intuitive interface, simple theming and easy rapid development... Shame it never happened.
This hits too close to home.