A decade ago every "omg just use [answer]!" was to suggest blockchain solve your problem.

Every possible problem seemed to have a solution that involved blockchain.

... now that "[answer]" is always "AI".

So I get his sense of cringe... while also acknowledging I had the same thought. We've never been better at pattern matching, pattern identification, OCR, translating across languages... seems like a great use of an LLM.

...but...

if "writing" is the act of conveying ideas through markings then... I guess it is kinda writing.

I'm super curious about this point:

> Name who deserves credit, in public. Use actual names, not “Thanks to the team.”

I read a story many years ago of a Western project manager in Japan and this epic gaffe he caused because he publicly praised one person.

The praised person was then seen as an upstart and trying to jump the chain of command and eventually left the company. (Leaving the company was also conveyed as a HUGE deal because I guess Japanese try really hard to stay at the same company for life.)

All because of a single statement of praise.

So I'm surprised to see this as advice suggesting a westerner do exactly what was portrayed as a cultural incongruency problem.

Seems like there's a nuance I'm missing.

Now I'm trapped just like most everyone else. Every photo is just "okay" in the moment but .. five years later the difference is so big.

99.999% of these "precious" photos are dumped in a hole and never looked at again. It feels silly to bother keeping it when I know I'm not going to sift through it.

All those hour-long videos of little-tyke sporting events shot from a million miles away... hahaha... still can't delete'm.

    > Are you thinking what I'm thinking, Pinky?
    > I think so, Brain, but --
    > YES! Time to take over the world [utilizing these philosopher kings]!

e.g. https://revealjs.com/#/2/1 <-- from here you can go up or down, then go right to continue the presentation.

You just make one slide deck with lightweight high-abstraction slides and depending on the audience you just... hit the down arrow. bam. now you're inside the tech slides. no nerdy tech guys? sweet, don't hit down on slide 3. Instead you're with the marketing guys, so hit down on slide 5.

Anyway - looks like you got rid of that in order to mimic Powerpoint, but... don't forget it's there. it's my favorite part of using Reveal.js!

Work is the thing that helps one lift society up.

We're all connected beings and one's occupation is how we each contribute to that society. The idea that it's something we suffer through in order to eat is a crummy reversal of the idea of having purpose.

It doesn't matter if one is selling toilets or scrubbing them, each of us is still keeping civilization in motion; giving it life.

Don't enjoy your occupation? Go back to school. Can't afford school? Hunt down people you respect and figure out how to work with or for them.

As anecdata: My wife has a "brainy" occupation and her brilliant sister does not. Correspondingly, my wife has no interest in "brainy" books in her free time whilst her sister is always recommending new 900 page tomes.

Recently, due to Scouts, learned more and I can't believe how often I use them.

    "Dryer's busted! My DIY laundry line sags! What to do?!"

    "If only I could make a loop that won't move in the middle of this rope!"

The "job" in the speech example would be "hey Joe, can I run this speech by you?"

In that scenario, the friend would:

  * feel valued, 
  * connect with you, 
  * have something to do socially instead of "sooo uh whatcha been up to... uh... nice weather...", and
  * get to hone their own speech skills by critiquing in a safe environment.

  - care about the long-term effects of their actions
  - care about the plan of their surroundings
  - plan to stick around

Notably this is equally applicable to any occupant-owned property (e.g. condos > apartments).

Keeping context confined to the 1999 and 1992 films... What meaning do you infer?

I still can't find an alternative.

He says:

> ... this corporate remake is a worse creative "theft" than ...

Context is that "this" is the 1999 film.

A sibling comment makes a separate point that even the 1992 film is not original content but nowhere in falcor84's comment does he refer to the franchise as a whole being "theft".

Regardless, it's clear from the post that the context is the 1999 film being `creative "theft"` which I inferred meant they changed the story in ways he didn't like but... he can weigh in if he feels like it.