It's clear that there was something that compelled you to write "yeah, so what?" as a rebuttal. But I can't tell if that came from a need to protect Franklin's public image, and to what end.

Throughout human history, there has been sparse evidence of historical figures which we draw (correctly) inspiration and admiration. I'll never forget reading Marcus Aurelius' Meditations where he was writing down in his journal how he was struggling to keep his sexual attraction to young boys at bay, who were also probably slaves. And he's still considered one of the five good emperors of Rome.

I'm not writing this to say whether any of them deserve it. I'm just pointing out that abuse of power isn't something new, and its expression isn't always known. For those people, the difference wasn't in their desires but that they had the power to act on them with no one batting an eye, and if they noticed they'd just walked it off.

Not that far from what we have today.

What baffles me is that, there's no way in the web app to assign a default calendar for new events. When I create a new event on the web, I have to scroll through all the calendars that I have and choose the one that I want every time. Meanwhile, in the mobile app, I can simply tap on a new block, the event window appears, and the selected calendar defaults to what I used for my last added event.

I'd be extremely cautious to ask it to have it explain any specialized concept even from a document.

Trails games are even worse because there's tons of them who feel like they never gotten properly play tested. Killing a level 120 boss with a level 60 squad because you can delay the opponent's turn just isn't satisfying, especially when the boss is meant to be (narration-wise) so much stronger than you.

Something in that sentence reminded me of the following Jobs' quote:

"Many companies forget what it means to make great products. After initial success, sales and marketing people take over and the product people eventually make their way out."

Capitalism suddenly gets gamed to the point where the quality isn't rewarded. I'm not just talking about software, but also hardware. There's a reason why planned obsolescence is a thing. In a way, software bloat is unplanned obsolescence.

The output, in my case, feels just as mine as the toppings I tell my local pizza store to add to whatever they're about to cook for me. It's tasty, and fills my stomach, but I didn't make it. I ordered it.

It's just power fantasy. It's amazing the first couple of times but as it wears off and becomes the new norm you forgot how being the one who decides which thing does what feels like.

Luckily (or unluckily?) the industry only cares about the end result, and flushes out people who used to reward for their passion and dedication naturally.

Communicating low effort used to be insulting to the consumer, yet now I'm expected to praise it? I understand that we're not talking about monetary exchange, but we're still talking about my finite time in this world, time that I could've been invest reading or looking at something else.

So we're going back to my favorite adage these days: If you cannot spend time writing it, I refuse to spend time reading it.

In fact, the moment I realize someone's content is AI generated, I just feed the links (youtube -> transcript, blog posts -> link) to chatGPT and have it generate a summary. That's because if you're in favor of using your time efficiently then so am I.

Is the amount of people making money from AI greater than the amount of people who lose money from AI? Is maximizing prosperity across humanity even a goal, at this point? Am I to be expected to believe, without doubting, that the end goal is the benefit of the many?

Regardless of whether you agree with the claim or not, it's definitely not the endgame.

In math classes back at school, it didn't matter how much the math professor explained how the formula works. What mattered is me putting in the effort to understand it. The implication to your example is, I should already be familiar enough to understand the generated code to the point where all the explanation that it's doing is effectively a "Quality of Life feature".

The fact that people jump on the "you're simply using it wrong" wagon in every HN comment section whenever someone shares their negative/neutral experience with it implies otherwise.

The customer won't be able to tell you "you're going too fast", but he will tell you that stuff break. On top of that, because the rate of shipping new features doesn't necessarily match with the rate of usage of said features the moment you'll find out about it will not happen ASAP but probably sometime later, making it even harder to truly know if going fast is the right thing to do in the moment.