I feel more like, for a lot of voters, climate change isn’t the reason to vote for or against someone while it absolutely a wedge issue for people in industries that cause climate change.

On VHS…

A lot of old Rocky and Bullwinkle cartoons, The Lion King, Rocky Horror Picture Show

Things like that.

I’ve only played one character with trauma. Even then, I made sure it was thematic and still allowed for him to function in a party.

It also made him a never nude.

Like the rest of my body, I use a loofah. I have enough mobility to get to my entire back from one arm.

Don’t stop in doorways when walking through public places.

People on Lemmy aren’t “normal” people and shouldn’t use their personal views as the norm.

I’m asking if it worth spending more money on human developers to write code that isn’t slop.

Everyone here has been mentioning costs, but they haven’t been comparing them together to see if the cost of using human developers located in a high cost of living American city is worth the benefits.

Historically open source and closed source have done the same thing, so why is this one tool usage so wildly different?

Because, as noted by another replier, open source wants working code and closed source just want code that runs.

That’s basically my question. If the standards of code are different, AI slop may be acceptable in one scenario but unacceptable in another.

So I was trying to make a statement that the developers of AI for coding may not have the high bar for quality and optimization that closed source developers would have, then was told that the major market was internal business code.

So, I asked, do companies need code that runs quickly on the systems that they are installed on to perform their function. For instance, can an unqualified programmer use AI code to build an internal corporate system rather than have to pay for a more qualified programmer’s time either as an internal hire or producing.

Does business internal software need to be optimized?

As a dumb question from someone who doesn’t code, what if closed source organizations have different needs than open source projects?

Open source projects seem to hinge a lot more on incremental improvements and change only for the benefit of users. In contrast, closed source organizations seem to use code more to quickly develop a new product or change that justifies money. Maybe closed source organizations are more willing to accept slop code that is bad but can barely work versus open source which won’t?

There are tons of open messaging protocols that have been replaced by closed ones. For instance, Discord shouldn’t be a thing since IRC exists, but Discord exists and is very successful.

For some reason, likely tied to how it is used, email survived as an open protocol.

It depends. I’m playing at a table where it isn’t any of the players’ first game and several players have wargaming experience. I can easily see the DM doing something like this and I wouldn’t fault them for doing so.

my heart.

It wasn’t that FEMA was a conspiracy theory, but that it would be used to imprison millions of Americans on federal land.

There are a lot of problematic parts to the movie that kind of got swept under the rug.

And then it turned out that for the 2024 presidential election, we went back to the Mojo Dojo Casa House.

Even by the 90’s, it was already accepted that being good with computers could be a great career path to make money. When I went to university in early 00’s, people who were on an engineering track commonly went into computers because the salaries were better than other engineering fields.

There were some people who loved the tech, but a lot of them made the choice due to financial reasons.

I try.

Compared to other public spaces, no.