PlexSheep

No it's magpiers

I have a somewhat similar project. I don't think "don't use LLMs" is particularly helpful.

My project is a never ending story with spinoffs that I never want to show anyone, but enjoy reading. At first, I used an LLM to make it with prompts of increasing complexity and results that we're usually soulless and imperfect.

The thing to understand is in my opinion, that you're using an actual machine ghostwriter. The machine doesn't share your thoughts and vision, which can be helpful but is often detrimental to quality.

A few months ago, while writing a particularly complex chapter, it completely stopped being "good enough", so I made the decision to write the stuff myself. But the problem: I am an awful author because I didn't actually learn so much since I didn't write it myself.

Now, my current approach is to write it myself (with my progress being much slower but of much higher quality and with much better quality control).

The machine ghostwriter is useful when it comes to brainstorming, proof reading and suggestions for rewording, I think. It has things in it's context that I simply don't know and that I don't even know I don't know, and it comes up with okay ideas and sometimes good rephrasing.

Of course, just accepting ai suggestions would lower quality, but if you're picky it could work well.

Let me know what you think, also anti ai absolutists let me know what you think. Contrary to how this might sound, I'm not particularly fond of LLMs, but it's helpful to get some feedback and ideas.

This is an awful "meme"

Ultimate is the best entry since melee, and both are still loved and played today. Nothing is wrong with smash bros.

Yes, the dlc chars are usually too strong, but same goes for some base characters and I don't feel like it's much if a problem. We get good actual content for the money.

If Nintendo releases a good smash for switch 2, they got me by the balls.

Da wird aber auch ein Gebäude, Werkzeuge, Shampoo etc benutzt. Das ist deswegen natürlich nicht "böse", aber es gibt eine gewisse Obergrenze an globalen Ressourcen/Materialverbrauch, nachdem es nicht mehr nachhaltig ist.

I'm stealing this

Deiner These, dass Wachstum unabhängig von realen Gütern Stattfinden kann, stimme ich nicht zu. Wachstum geht leider immer mit steigenden Ressourcenverbrauch einher, das suggeriert jedenfalls die Wissenschaft.

(Achtung! Gefährliches Angelsächsisch!)

In this interpretation, our results highlight that institutions provide important framework conditions, but they are no general panacea to further decrease the resource dependency of economic growth.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140988323004401

Ich habe keine Umfassende Literaturrecherche gemacht, aber klar, Produktion braucht immer mehr Ressourcen (Energie, Werkzeug, Wohnung, Rohe Ressourcen). Auch Dienstleistungen brauchen Ressourcen, wenn auch weniger. Ohne Ressourcen keine Energie und ohne Energie keine Arbeit, Produktion, etc.

Das scheint beim Kapitalismus so ein Ding zu sein, dass das immer von einem "externen" System mehr und mehr genommen wird, sonst gibt's kein profitables Wachstum.

Für mehr zu diesem Thema empfehle ich dieses sehr interessante Buch zum Thema "degrowth", das infrage stellt, warum eigentlich alles immer wachsen muss: "Less is More" von Jason Hickel.

Aber wir brauchen doch das Wachstum damit der Kapitalismus weiter so toll funktioniert. Kann doch nicht sein dass man mal ausgewachsen ist.

Doesn't spoil as quickly...?

Ants even have soldiers

Am German and not autistic. Test shows 44% for both, which is inaccurate.

Capitalism is different from a regular market in that it is not just trying to make a profit in order to have enough money to exchange for useful goods and services.

Capitalism demands that your profit grows and grows and grows. It's growth for it's own sake. A capitalistic economy like our world economy needs to grow 3% or so every year or it gets into a recession. 3% doesn't sound like much, but it's exponential growth, doubling every 25 years or so. This growth doesn't come out of thin air, but from extracting from value from other people, our world and so on.

And measuring an economy by GDP is incomplete, because it doesn't take uncompensated labor, human happiness and wellbeing, and public goods (like a healthy nature) into account. When a factory owner pollutes and dries up the river while employees have no choice but to work 16 hour weeks, GDP goes up.

In nature, things grow until they are mature. That does not mean progress halts. Adults don't grow anymore, but continue to learn.

My try to explain why money and markets are okay, but growth for it's own sake (growthism you may call it) is destroying our societies, making us unhappy, and is also killing us with the climate and biodiversity crises.