And the related XKCD https://www.xkcd.com/599/

I wonder if there is an XKCD number: how many ref outs until you can find an XKCD comic?

Genuinely curious to your age, as I'm suspecting some recency bias? As Bob Ross certainly was well known throughout Europe way before the 2010s.

If you were growing up without cable in the US when he was on the air, PBS was one of like five channels you could watch.

All us kids in the US knew him growing up in the 80’s, as he was on just before the cartoons on Saturday mornings.

Looking at your site. I think the big disclaimer around the site not being for mobile is more off-putting then then the actual UI. Especially as a landing page it is fine. Maybe put that disclaimer later on ?

There is info in the FAQ section, but of course, people complained that they should be told when they enter the website as they see it looking broken on their phone. As you can see on your own use case, there is no pleasing everybody :D

It is definitely the right place!

How did you verify it worked?

Without any offense to you, the creator of this app. It's obvious a lot of care went into it and you wanted to create a better product than what is out there. Even considering the mental impact such ranking could have.

However, I genuinely feel that the need for this app is what's wrong with society.

What's wrong with this? Seems like a more independent alternative to asking a friend which picture looks better.

I personally would prefer a randomly selected load of strangers to vote on, say, my best corporate headshot to display to the general public rather than my friends who are a small and biased group.

I guess the people that self-select to go on a photo ranking site may not be representative of the general public, though are probably better than the (all male) 10ish engineers and 3 accountants that I socialize with on a regular basis.

No offense taken, I also have many qualms about the role looks and photos play in our society. The destruction & gamification of social interaction by tech is a genuine harm.

Unfortunately it's what we're dealing with right now, and people need feedback to be able to play the game.

IMO this is clearly implicit in the "you are a grandmaster chess player" prompt. As that should make generating best possible move tokens more likely.

Is it? What if the AI is better than a grandmaster chess player and is generating the most likely next move that a grandmaster chess player might make and not the most likely move to win, which may be different?

Depends on the training data I think. If the data divides in games by top chess engines - and human players, then yes, it might make a difference to tell it, to play like a grandmaster of chess vs. to play like the top chess engine.

Grandmasters usually play grandmasters of similar ELO, so it might think it doesn't always win. Even if it should recognize the player isn't a grandmaster, it still may be better to include that, though who knows without testing.

It's mentioned in the article..

Maybe you’ve never worked at a company like this. Did you not see the note about his perf review, which had nothing to do with his performance (the actual outcome) but instead had random negative feedback? Like not involving coworkers enough? What if your “confession” indicated that you have a hard time opening up and involving others? Couching your feedback in a personal insecurity makes it far less likely it will be challenged since the person already has a complex about it.

> random negative feedback? Like not involving coworkers enough?

You got the order of events wrong. That was with the first manager, before the "10% more vulnerable" meeting. (Not saying it's a good idea though.) (Or did you mean sth else?)

From the article:

> I told my team I was struggling with depression and took some time off. ...

> My team was extremely supportive.

You haven't been in corporate long enough bub.