joeshoop.bsky.social
Seattle design person.
A mess of atoms temporarily arranged in the vague shape of a human body.
upleft.com
58 posts
46 followers
236 following
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Is this an entire business centered on a reference to a 3 season show from 50 years ago?
comment in response to
post
No Man’s Figma
comment in response to
post
One thing I love about the studio display is that on video calls, voices come through the monitor at the same volume the person was speaking.
comment in response to
post
I think it’s to allow a check for things like 2fa or passwordless login methods like FaceID or Passkeys.
Bummer that it complicates the login process for everybody, especially if you’re using a password manager.
comment in response to
post
Don’t make me add Cheeto to my blocklist.
comment in response to
post
.zeldman[data-*=“birthday”] {
content:”Happy Birthday!”;
background: url(“balloons.gif”);
}
comment in response to
post
This is exactly the kind of pointlessly argumentative post he is talking about. You are the problem.
comment in response to
post
Nice! Looks like this just got enough support to become a viable option within the last year.
comment in response to
post
Was a fan of the color functions. Being able to adjust lightness or saturation on a color allowed for some cool stuff.
Like being able to lighten a color by 10% for a hover, or using a darker shade of a background color for a border.
comment in response to
post
There is a camera passthrough that creates the illusion you can see the background, but it is entirely through a screen.
comment in response to
post
I just want him to play a young Steve Buscemi
comment in response to
post
VR goggles will never have mass appeal like a device you can glance at while doing other things.
comment in response to
post
All I've blocked so far is two last names, I bet you can guess which ones.
comment in response to
post
A L I E N : F U C K
comment in response to
post
As is the claim of non-inevitability.
comment in response to
post
You know just as much about the future as I do, which is nothing.
The only kind of proof one can make about an unrealized outcome is with rationalizations.
comment in response to
post
People had the same sentiment about computers, the internet, cell phones, smart phones, etc.
You can get by without those things, but the world changes even if you choose to stand still.
comment in response to
post
Inevitable only means that a thing can’t be stopped, not that it is all-consuming.
Inevitable in the sense that even if you don’t use it, other people will.
comment in response to
post
My aim is to be objective and realistic about the future.
AI is loaded full of ethical problems from all angles. We should be extremely critical of it, and we should object to it's use in specific ways.
I don't think "AI is bad, I don't want it, get it away" is a very nuanced or useful take.
comment in response to
post
"We can't make it not exist" points pretty directly back at the inevitability, no?
comment in response to
post
Lol you're the one that first used the word in this thread, and now you're really stretching the definition.
To be clear, my argument is that AI exists, that we can't make it not exist, and that people use tools they find useful.
comment in response to
post
Common. Typical. Usual. It implies that there are exceptions. That it is not a universal.
comment in response to
post
Do you understand what 'generally' means?
comment in response to
post
You read "people", understood that I meant "people in general", but are arguing as though I said "all people".
And what I really meant was "people will generally choose technology that feels nicer to use". This statement has nothing to do with AI.
comment in response to
post
Shocked at how many professional designers use groups in Figma instead of frames.
comment in response to
post
What are "these things" that I want?
comment in response to
post
People don't "want AI". They want the result it gives them. It is already a much better experience than google for a lot of really basic things, like looking up the cast of a tv show.
AI allows a softer way of interacting with technology that people will prefer.
comment in response to
post
It is inevitable because the tech is out in the open. You can run your own LLM locally at home.
comment in response to
post
Diablo 2: Lord of Destruction was a better expansion, imo.
comment in response to
post
Me too, Mike. Me, too.
comment in response to
post
Have you tried
lookingtobookafewdayswiththefamilyinstuttgart.com
comment in response to
post
Dry January still works
comment in response to
post
But that SEO-stuffed story is why you landed on that recipe in particular.
comment in response to
post
Michael.
comment in response to
post
Ive liked the ability with chatgpt to be really specific. Since it isn't integrated with my text editor, I feel like I have some more control without it going wild. I copy a section of code and ask it to refine or add some specific functionality, and then I can paste it back into the text editor.
comment in response to
post
Just pasted in a text doc into v0 and asked it to build the described thing - it does a pretty good job of matching the described functionality! Have been using chatgpt to generate code for some product ideas, and have been impressed, but its all very manual compared to v0.
comment in response to
post
Finally watching through West Wing for the first time, and it is so. good. Every episode is timely and relevant, but this episode in particular.
comment in response to
post
It’s funnier because in the states we’d call that a life preserver. To me, there’s no buoy in this photo.
comment in response to
post
I scrolled threads a bit but found it was mostly a lot of lame engagement posts and mostly not from people I wanted to engage with. Here feels like a lot more actual people.
comment in response to
post
Tryin’
comment in response to
post
There are 8.2 billion genders.
comment in response to
post
"A category is at best a proxy; at worst, a shackle."
From Why Fish Don't Exist by Lulu Miller
comment in response to
post
I see where you're coming from. I would agree that humans are "a binary species" in the sense that it takes a pair to reproduce.
But "sex is binary" is saying that there is a clear, distinct line between the sexes. The existence of any intersex condition is evidence that a binary is too simplistic.
comment in response to
post
The edge would claim otherwise.
comment in response to
post
My point is that all categories, universally, have undefinable edges. The categories exist, but so do the edges.
comment in response to
post
Nothing has supported it either.
comment in response to
post
Ah, so there are things other than gamete size.
So far you've mentioned four things that you'd look to to determine sex. Each of those four factors has three possible states: Male, Female, or Undetermined.
That is 3^4 different possible sets. 81.
Which sets are male and which are female?
comment in response to
post
The original thing is about sex, so the weeds of biology is an appropriate place for this to have gone.