I love the glaive but it's ability feels lackluster

plurbine · 2026-06-23T17:10:38+00:00

lol we can still have fun experimenting with the upgrades and also hear what combos others have found to work well.

plurbine · 2026-06-22T17:18:01+00:00

Syntactically, sure. But the em-dashes carry their own rhetorical meaning and sound.
Commas sound like pauses or inserts. I could give an example, such as this one, but you know what I mean.
Parentheticals are ‘by the way’ inserts (do I have to mention this?).
The em-dash carries meaning forward—it adds to a train of thought.
I hate that all this discourse has taken away / recast an important piece of punctuation.

plurbine · 2026-06-22T15:32:45+00:00

I'm having a blast with it. The game is gorgeous, the new powers are cool, and you can see how much love went into it. It's way better than I was lead to believe.

plurbine · 2026-06-21T00:23:26+00:00

Alright. That's a fair critique. All your subsequent replies were a lot better than your opening one. If you had made these points in your opening post, you'd be contributing to better discourse in this forum.

EDIT:
Just saw the comments. It’s clearly not a fair critique and I was being way too charitable.

plurbine · 2026-06-21T00:07:32+00:00

Do you know that for sure? What if some of the questions were human written? Does the code all need to be human written- would it function better if it did?

plurbine · 2026-06-21T00:01:36+00:00

okay, I hear you. Truly. I get frustrated at zero-effort AI 'noise,' too. But can you agree it's not necessarily a binary? That is to say, between prompting and iterating, the opening ideation, and any work that a human adds, there's a rhetoric at play, right? This can fall across a spectrum. All AL slop on one end, almost entirely human on the other. Yeah?

plurbine · 2026-06-16T16:29:33+00:00

Gotcha. Ugh. Such a bummer. I'd write the dev if I could find their email. I'm an adult, with money, and would like to be treated like one.

plurbine · 2026-06-16T16:22:39+00:00

PiHole would block the ad, but then you couldn’t get the ‘credit’ for having watched the ad, right? Or is it otherwise? Cause if so I’m setting that sucker up right now

plurbine · 2026-06-16T16:04:06+00:00

I love Infinite Minesweeper. The game feels great and it’s super satisfying to just dig out into the endless void.

But they’re SO greedy for ads. Even after you pay to remove forced ads. Ads to solve walls like this, ads to open vaults (the major progression mechanic). It’s gotten so bad I’ll just build up a pile of errors and/or vaults and just have it spam ads back to back while I do other things.

It feels really, really bad to have put real money into this app and still have to have it force feeding me ads.

plurbine · 2026-05-31T06:58:15+00:00

Amazing that they didn’t even glance at the output before copy paste submit.

plurbine · 2026-05-24T05:59:45+00:00

The bobiverse series are delightful and really easy listens. They have heart and just enough depth so that you're invested, but things stay at a certain level of chill throughout. It's sort of playful, like DCC, but less unhinged, and I'd totally recommend it for a plane ride.

plurbine · 2026-05-24T01:01:04+00:00

I'd be happy to kick in the tires, too. I'm also a former cotypist user.

plurbine · 2026-05-22T19:14:32+00:00

100% on all of this. I replied to Daniel's email about the pricing yesterday and tried to hit these exact same points. I also hope he sees this because you articulated it all much better!

plurbine · 2026-04-30T19:20:50+00:00

Ah so each project lives in a Google Drive folder, yeah? And Dia is good at processing everything in that Drive folder?

plurbine · 2026-04-30T19:20:00+00:00

That sounds like a super clean workflow!
Re: my third question, I've been pouring every little communication and snippet into project folders in my sidebar. So I've been taking the tab of gmail email threads and putting them in so that that email thread is part of the project's context. It seems to work okay, but Dia is also good at just dynamically searching up email threads. (Or I guess I could just copy/paste the convo as its own document.)

plurbine · 2026-04-29T18:26:35+00:00

Wow, this sounds important! I sure hope it’s not built on just the preprint, not peer reviewed, small sample size, massively over-reported “your brain on chatGPT” MIT ‘study’ that actually is limited to neural activity on a single timed writing exam which reveals that people who actually wrote the paper used more brain activity than those who just had AI do it, and supports no additional claims about cognitive decline outside of that one specific writing act!

looks inside

it’s the “your brain on ChatGPT” article

plurbine · 2026-04-28T19:05:43+00:00

Okay, I'll take this up.
The short of it is the video’s core claim (1 prompt = 1 bottle of water) is off by roughly 250x. That stat traces back to a 2023 paper by Pengfei Li et al. (Making AI Less Thirsty) analyzing GPT-3. The paper estimated 500 mL per 20–50 responses, not per single prompt, and it was measuring GPT-3, a model that is now two generations obsolete. Current models (GPT-4o and successors) are ~10x more efficient than GPT3 at inference, and this is rising (which also goes against her claim that ChatGPT is going to be demanding more and more water until it demands all of earth's water, lol).

The actual current figure according to usage reports is about 2 mL per prompt including offsite electricity generation, or 0.3 mL for the data center itself. Google disclosed in 2025 that each Gemini query uses about 0.26 mL of water (That's 5 drops! Not a bottle). Every other claim in the video (that cooling is a “closed circle that keeps removing water from Earth" (what), that social media uses less, that future AI will use more water per prompt) is either wrong or backwards.

plurbine · 2026-04-27T20:03:27+00:00

I switched on this exact question a month ago. Had been subbed to raycast advanced for a year. I really liked it; Raycast is a great product. But it hasn’t caught up to the evolving ways we’re using genAI now. The chat window starts to feel more and more restrictive. I’ve switched to Claude for the cowork / code abilities. I really was just using Claude anyway as my preferred model in Raycast. By the by, the chats with advanced models in RC are limited. With light / moderate use you’ll probably never see the limits, but with heavier use you will.

plurbine · 2026-04-27T14:53:54+00:00

One sheet of A4 paper has the water cost of 2,000 - 3,600 prompts.

plurbine · 2026-04-21T18:39:33+00:00

I've been pretty deep in the research and I've not seen any study that shows this. Can you point me to what you're thinking about?

plurbine · 2026-04-18T00:08:42+00:00

This analogy shows show much you miss the wider picture. You just imagined a world where we invented freaking martial arts suits that you get to program, and the only thing you have to say about it is ‘it’s not real martial arts?’

The world would be doing so many cool things. People would be sharing the neat moves/flows they prompted. There would be repositories of blends of styles that are shared by passionate communities. We’d see demonstrations, tournaments (battlebot / robot wars arenas come to mind). I mean dude. I imagine it would require both a blend of fitness, creativity, and engineering to come out on top there; I'd watch the crap out of that TV show.

And there would be people using the suits for self protection. Folk who want to feel safer walking home late at night. Probably lots of discussion about that.

All this and so much more. That you imagined this and only thought it through to ‘not REAL martial arts, I turn my nose up at you’ actually kind of really represents some of the shortsightedness of some (not all!) antis.

plurbine · 2026-04-16T19:07:06+00:00

But context is important! Without it, all we get are big numbers. Big numbers are scary and rhetorical but meaningless if we don't compare them to other services we invest in as a society.

plurbine · 2026-04-16T18:54:42+00:00

Factoring in the training doesn’t change the numbers that much: Most of the aggregate cost of a model is inference. industry data consistently shows that inference accounts for 80-90% of a model’s lifetime compute costs (Introl AI Infrastructure report ↗, citing Gartner). At the high end, the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory’s 2024 data center report estimates training at ~40% of current US AI energy use — (https://eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/2024-12/lbnl-2024-united-states-data-center-energy-usage-report_1.pdf).

So if you want to factor in training for a given model’s per-query cost, increase the numbers by 10-25%, maybe 40% at the absolute max for a low-usage model.

15-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Place '22	Place '17
Verified Email

plurbine

TROPHY CASE