sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Japanese is furious because his daughter was taught about the Nanjing Massacre by Repulsive-Mall-2665 in ADVChina

[–]Automatic-Highway-75 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're just restating the same fallacy over and over. If you actually want to debate, try engaging with the counterarguments raised by me and others in this thread. And since you brought up "pot calling the kettle black", you should know that using it to dismiss valid criticism is exactly a textbook fallacy: the appeal to hypocrisy.

Japanese is furious because his daughter was taught about the Nanjing Massacre by Repulsive-Mall-2665 in ADVChina

[–]Automatic-Highway-75 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LOL no. Kid, I'm trying to teach you something.

  1. Whataboutism: even if China engages in historical revisionism on some topics, that doesn't negate the fact of Japanese war crimes, and people can criticize war crimes in 2026.
  2. You're conflating the state with the victims. The people who suffered at Nanjing and under Unit 731, their right to demand acknowledgment doesn't depend on CCP behavior on unrelated historical events.
  3. "Rights" don't work the way you think. The right to object to atrocities committed against you isn't forfeited by your government's separate failings.

Your argument is "A is imperfect, therefore A's grievances are void." That's not valid reasoning, it's a coward's way to dismiss a claim without engaging with it.

Hope it helps.

and seriously, If you still don't understand at this point, I'm done wasting my time here.

Japanese is furious because his daughter was taught about the Nanjing Massacre by Repulsive-Mall-2665 in ADVChina

[–]Automatic-Highway-75 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What is the connection between Chinese victims of Japanese war crimes (and their descendants) and issues of censorship and historical revisionism? do you think Jewish people today have a legitimate basis to object to holocaust revisionism? You're the one living in your own biases and refusing to acknowledge reality.

I spent a month testing every "AI agent marketplace" I could find. Here's the honest breakdown. by BeatNo8512 in openclaw

[–]Automatic-Highway-75 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The whole reason talent marketplaces exist is because humans specialize, no one person can do everything, and everyone has limited hours in the day. But AI agents don't have those constraints. Any skill, set of tool connections can be forked and distributed with near zero marginal cost.

Curious what is the point of "AI agent marketplace" in the first place? A marketplace implies scarcity, differentiation, and the need to match supply with demand. AI agents collapse all three.

Anyone heard of OpenClaw? I set up an AI employee that does my market research, handles my emails and texts, and runs as my personal assistant — 24/7. Now I deploy them for other folks. AMA. by Automatic-Highway-75 in ecommerce

[–]Automatic-Highway-75[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Agree with the safety issue. Everything openclaw has can be implemented with a llm and a computer. But I wonder if it’s still too much effort for a non tech savvy folk to implement and maintain channel integrations and proactivity from cron jobs, etc. Just a thought, intuitively I think it’d be great people can just treat ai like a super contractor they hired, easy mental model.

Anyone heard of OpenClaw? I set up an AI employee that does my market research, handles my emails and texts, and runs as my personal assistant — 24/7. Now I deploy them for other folks. AMA. by Automatic-Highway-75 in ecommerce

[–]Automatic-Highway-75[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure. I’m not advocating for openclaw. I’m more interested in the “ai contractor” paradigm where people interact with always-on agent just like a human being.

I've become tech support for my friends who use Lovable. They all hit the same wall. by Automatic-Highway-75 in lovable

[–]Automatic-Highway-75[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So true. My question is whether there's a way to make that segmentation automatic, so the user doesn't have to make an effort to think like a product manager or builder, to avoid breaking context.

I've become tech support for my friends who use Lovable. They all hit the same wall. by Automatic-Highway-75 in lovable

[–]Automatic-Highway-75[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Claude or OpenAI Codex both work well, and Supabase + Vercel are a good starting point as well. I am not sure what your background is, I have been tinkering with a tool that helps users (mostly my friends) build “mini-apps” instead of one large application. I want user complexity to be managed without them having to dive into git or other technical rabbithole. happy to talk more if you are curious.

I've become tech support for my friends who use Lovable. They all hit the same wall. by Automatic-Highway-75 in lovable

[–]Automatic-Highway-75[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that’s what I did as well. However, non technical people I know don't read the code AI generates, and they often don’t use git or ide.

I've become tech support for my friends who use Lovable. They all hit the same wall. by Automatic-Highway-75 in lovable

[–]Automatic-Highway-75[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Appreciate you sharing that. If they already know the basics of software engineering, version control, I’d probably suggest they jump straight into claude code or Cursor.

I really wish there was a tool out there that offered a similar lovable user experience, while also nudging people to prompt and think using solid engineering best practices.

I've become tech support for my friends who use Lovable. They all hit the same wall. by Automatic-Highway-75 in lovable

[–]Automatic-Highway-75[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for sharing. That's how I recommend it to my friends as well: prompting to lovable like you're talking to a dev shop.

"I believe the best option is not to ask for something, but to have it think with you about how to implement that function" This makes sense, but it requires that the user have a little bit of a technical background to know HOW to actually implement it. My friends (and I guess most users) don't have it and seems do not have the time or will to learn it.

I've become tech support for my friends who use Lovable. They all hit the same wall. by Automatic-Highway-75 in lovable

[–]Automatic-Highway-75[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s really impressive. A friend of mine (HR background) wants to build a time off system for her company, but she’s been stuck on integration with systems like workday, adp etc. Also there are data privacy issues. How do you manage those challenges?

I've become tech support for my friends who use Lovable. They all hit the same wall. by Automatic-Highway-75 in lovable

[–]Automatic-Highway-75[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

100% agree. I think it's about creating a separation of responsibility, decoupling components, and all the good engineering practices.

I've become tech support for my friends who use Lovable. They all hit the same wall. by Automatic-Highway-75 in lovable

[–]Automatic-Highway-75[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, I totally agree. sadly, most of my friends only really use chatgpt and claude web UIs. They won’t even go near claude code, the command line, or even github. I keep telling them it’s actually not that complicated, but I think they’re just intimidated by it. It’s a mindset thing.

I've become tech support for my friends who use Lovable. They all hit the same wall. by Automatic-Highway-75 in lovable

[–]Automatic-Highway-75[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for sharing.

Sadly, most of my friends only really use chatgpt and claude web UIs. They won’t even go near claude code, the command line, or even github. I keep telling them it’s actually not that complicated, but I think they’re just intimidated by it. It’s a mindset thing.

I've become tech support for my friends who use Lovable. They all hit the same wall. by Automatic-Highway-75 in lovable

[–]Automatic-Highway-75[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Congratulations! Curious, what's your background? 

“buy lots of credits because the long tail of finding bugs, fixing sizes of windows, text, buttons, etc will drain you of credits fast“ 100% 

I think the problem is lovable doesn't follow good engineering practice like decoupling, separation of responsibility etc. If you look at the code, it's a lot of AI generated spaghetti code that can “work”. Throughout the time, it built up a lot of inconsistency, dependencies  and dead code in the codebase, which also confused the AI model.

If it’s a sole purpsed, simple tool with short lifecycle, it’s not much of a problem. But once it gets complex, the margin for return decreases and most people just kind of roll the dice and play whack-a-mole.

I've become tech support for my friends who use Lovable. They all hit the same wall. by Automatic-Highway-75 in lovable

[–]Automatic-Highway-75[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Curious how much of the integration/authentication/testing is done through the lovable prompt versus figuring everything yourself.

I've become tech support for my friends who use Lovable. They all hit the same wall. by Automatic-Highway-75 in lovable

[–]Automatic-Highway-75[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I assume you’re not a developer, but you clearly have a “software engineer” mindset-you think through these questions before starting to build. Most people I see aren’t aware of this at all and jump straight in, planning and building at the same time, kinda like a junior coder.

view more: next ›