Perfection xD

That cafeteria (I know, not day 8) was mean to my RAM.

Spin it further and get rid of “great” and “outstanding”. I suggest using plus good and double plus good.

they have no means

TSA anal probing everyone in a 10 mile radius around an airport

A dovecot

What do you mean, all the hosts on WCTR were totally…oh. nevermind.

Ah I see, the damned slumber button.

Lol, which phone doesn’t come with an alarm functionality? Even the good old Nokia 3310 had one.

Making meaning out of words which signify nothing is guessing at best :P

I have no idea about scratch, whether it’s good or gets improved by turbowarp.

I must preface this with a disclaimer: my experience with persons from your ecosystem (based on the domain you shared) is limited to a number of persons I can count on one hand. I don’t intend to make this sound racist or assume a better-than-you stance.

Mainly about the admitting lack of knowledge or ability. I feel like this is a no-go and considered shameful in your ecosystem. I’ve worked with colleagues with this mindset a few years and it was usually troublesome to find out they were in way over their head and if they would’ve asked the team for feedback early, we as a team could’ve avoided some delays or bad infrastructure (code design) issues. It was a good learning experience for me, I now put my early drafts to team review to avoid exactly that situation.

This may sound old fashioned, but for learning the basics, I would stick to books instead of LLMs. Just because LLMs can state untruths with absolute confidence and because you are lacking the basics, you cannot spot that. Once you have good fundamentals learning from LLMs can be helpful but I would always request sources and check them. LLMs are not magic know-it-alls, they try to distill large amounts of text into small chunks and that process can be faulty. You are already on a good way here with you trying to sense when they give false information, but as I said, without solid fundamentals you might betray yourself with a false sense of safety here.

Your plan at teaching / guiding youth in technology is good, but as I said in an earlier comment teachers and guides should be very well versed in their field, otherwise they might teach untruths. And that hurts you twice, once because students will remember you teaching something wrong with confidence and it also might devalue everything else you taught. In the students mind, the thought “but what if that thing he/she said was also wrong?” will stick. For guidance, I would look up local hacker spaces, since they are keen on sharing their knowledge. At least here that’s the case.

That’s honestly what I expected from an LLM. If you extract the information from all the blabbering, you basically get what I said about good teacher traits. :D

I’ve completed my education way before AI was a thing and got my academical degrees just before LLMs hit the general public, so I cannot judge how severe the influence of LLMs in the teaching world will be. I doubt it will be significant since LLMs lack one ability good teachers have and show: the ability to say “I don’t know but I will find out and tell you next lesson”. A LLM would rather make up some bullshit and present it as absolute fact before admitting it doesn’t “know”.

What I saw in my teachers and valued as role models:

• Very good grasp of their subject
• Ability to transfer knowledge from a subfield they excel in to another subfield they are not excellent
• As stated above: ability to admit lack of knowledge
• Ability to use scientific methods to prove or disprove a theory and present this process

What I haven’t seen but assume based on the fact that teachers must complete academic education and earn a degree here: ability to learn a subject in self study, reading established source material, drawing conclusions from it and proving or disproving them.

Those are the standards I hold a professional teacher to. Tutors (as in other students teaching after hours) don’t need to have all that obviously, but having those traits certainly improves their value as teaching person.

I doubt you have good teaching capabilities right now. Your behavior doesn’t strike me as that of a teaching person. I cannot put a finger on it but I cannot imagine your behavior on role models and teacher figures I encountered in my life.

Posting the same text in the headline, body and text-on-picture, that is spam.

Based on your post history and behavior I would hope they don’t learn it from you in your current state.

That spam doesn’t pay.

Usually in the “lets see how this random project I cloned from GitHub works for my use case” scenario. I want to see how it works and if it would cover my use case before spending time on checking code and dependencies for security issues.

That only holds value if you are sure the audience knows you will be joking, just as [email protected] explained. Also one could be nit picking and say you don’t explain the joke but the fact that you are joking. :^)

The commenter could’ve saved grace by adding a /s but I don’t know how well that is known with the Facebook crowd. For all I know they would probably think it is some cool haxx0r code doing magic things to their profile.