A dot a day keeps the clutter away(scottlawsonbc.com) |
A dot a day keeps the clutter away(scottlawsonbc.com) |
I like the dots, they are visual, you can see at a glance - standing in the lab. You could graph your digital data of box usage in the lab over time from home. I understand you've attained desired function and have no reason to do that.
I'm not picking on you - I'm seeing this type of content all over and I also understand why we are retreating from digital spaces... but,
This is a clever "life hack" - partly bc it isn't reliant on any technology and that is clearly stated -> very functional but almost anti-tech, being such a hit on HN is actually quite interesting.
Say you have only 5 colors: green, blue, orange, purple, red.
1st year: green
2nd year: replace the green dot with blue
3rd year: replace the blue dot with orange
4th year: replace the orange dot with purple
5th year: replace the purple dot with red
6th year: red + add green dot
7th year: red + replace the green dot with blue
I have some I don’t think I use. I’m going to adopt this idea. Instead of dots, however, I think I’ll just use a pen/pencil. Maybe I’ll print space for the marks on my labels.
I just purchased a cheap thermal sticker printer that I may use instead of my label maker. But handwriting labels would be fine too.
BTW: gonna take a lot of ideas from this article, thanks for sharing!
I always considered I would do something similar if I owned a used book store. Each year would usher in a new colors. All books acquired that year get that colored dot on the inside page.
Some 5 years (or so) on I could easily go through each shelf of books and find the ones that were not moving. These get one last chance (a year?) in a bargain bin before then they go to Goodwill or wherever.
Otherwise a used bookstore can remain in a "picked over" and cluttered state.
I also keep a pair of scissors in there since there's no reason to look in two places at once.
my collection isn't quite the same categories since it's a hash of craft, electronics, DIY and just general household stuff so my categories are more about size and actions vs likelihood of use. I have "very tiny things", "smart devices", "covers, cases and stands", "cables modern", "cables ancient", "adaptors & extenders".
the best two boxes we've ever implemented: "gribbins: known use" "gribbins: unknown use" for the leftover bits at the end of a project or the spares for something you bought online all labelled in the known box and thrown into three unknown box. if your looking for something in our house its in one of these two boxes!
sometimes things are sub-bagged and labelled in IKEA sandwich bags because free colour coding others it's a free for all because we use it often
I have found this same thing to be true. I even tell my family that if for some reason they need to access all our critical info on my computer, the most recent files in each directory are almost always the most interesting ones.
I don't know about the dots, though. These boxes are so flimsy that I immediately know which ones are used most often by how beat up they've become in less than a year. :)
I put a strip of yellow or blue painters tape on it, and write with a sharpee a general description of the box.
Might just add another piece of tape to add marks for usage. Peeling dots would kill me.
I feel like this adds a ton of visual noise. It would annoy me
And for small things, like cables you don't often use... You never know when you'll need them. I've been telling myself I'm just going to throw them away after all, but then within a month of deciding that, I end up using a cable that I hadn't even seen in 2 years, and I had to hunt pretty hard for it. And it's a $10+ cable.
The article sounds like it's going to address these issues with the dots, but then just doesn't. I'm actually not even sure what the point of the dots is other than to convince the author that they're doing something about their problem, when they're really just putting stickers on things and buying more bins.
Dont justify after the fact just dumbly implement the rule.
I simplified a lot of things when I was moving back in. I’m sure I threw out some things I should have kept. For cables specifically I need a better system than going through a large plastic box. Probably some garage reorganization thing.
My wife's strategy on clothes I had that she didn't like was to hide them in the back of the closet. If I hadn't asked where a particular shirt was in a year, that was her signal that it was fine to throw out. Must have worked because I wasn't aware of it until she told me, years later!
if you're not going to use your ice cream maker every week, why have it on your kitchen counter, or kitchen shelf, put it away in a cupboard
The extreme form of this causes:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoarding#Anxiety
For ice cream specifically, America's Test Kitchen has you covered with "How to Make Homemade Ice Cream Without A Machine":
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72Ml3U39xqs
And their video on some of the science behind making good ice cream:
"If you get rid of clutter, there will be cases where you'll have gotten rid of something useful at that moment. It's not about avoiding that -- it's about accepting the right tradeoff between cleanliness and functionality."
An ice cream maker costs maybe $200? How would you feel if you disposed of the ice cream maker and then a week later realized you wanted it?
If you want to soften the blow, don’t throw things away: give them away to someone who will use them.
I hate owning things, owning an ice cream maker that I never use would weigh on me and I would much rather spend $200 on a new ice cream maker every 5 years (that I give away after a month) than have an unused ice cream maker for 5 years.
One example is a Picomotor piezo actuator. It's a really cool piece of technology. I want to believe so badly that I'll use it in a project someday.
but after four years and seeing zero dots on it, it's like having concrete evidence PROVING that I'm delusionally optimistic about how useful it is. I can't ignore the reality.
the Picomotor is my version of your ice cream maker. the lack of dots gives me the evidence I need to finally donate it to a better home
I don't follow the above like a religion, but it is good advice. I have a collection of things my grandma made that I look at once a year just because having it gives me joy and that once a year rule means I have to look at it or get rid of it. (I don't know how to explain to my kids why they give me joy - she died long before they were born so they have no memories of her hobbies)
I end up hoarding things for the same reason, and the mental gymnastics I try to play with myself (using that ice cream machine as an example) is to think of cases where I would be willing to make ice cream, but wouldn't be willing to go buy store bought ice cream as an alternative. Usually means I need to quickly go research what I think might be interesting about the thing... and then I fall short because... there's some cool ice cream recipe ideas online... and then I enjoy make the proverbial matcha gelato that weekend... and the machine goes in the packed cupboard for another 3 months.
I'm not 100% sure if that's a good or bad outcome haha. The pattern has repeated itself with any clutter that happens to enable a weekend project once a year.
Consider that it's just an ice cream maker. Few people need an ice cream maker. Few people need or even benefit from all the crap they buy in consumerist societies and pile into their houses.
You say you may want to make ice cream one day. So what? That's hardly a good basis for keeping something, especially in light of evidence to the contrary. So what if you one day want to make ice cream? So you don't make ice cream. So what Do you have to satisfy every impulse? The psycho-spiritual burden, distraction, and waste this thinking produces far outweighs some one-off use.
Maybe a friend has an ice cream maker, perhaps one he uses all the time. Ask to borrow it for those one-off cases. Or make it a social event.
In the UK I settled on Really Useful Boxes. Not their new cheaper range, the chunky straight-sided ones.
Transparent, they don't go brittle in a few years (I guess they will eventually), the front-opening ones are handy if you're racking them, and you've got some guarantee you can go back and buy more in a couple of years.
I wouldn't be surprised if I've spent £1k on RUBs over the years, but they really were worth it. The only problem I've found is that they don't have overhanging lips, so you can't build floating bin shelving (eg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYX50-Vw9AQ) for them.
- The value of the information: This is the purpose of the dots and, I think the stated reason for the dots.
- The value of the process: If you did this and didn't have the final dot information, would it still be valuable in some way? I suspect there is value here in creating friction that helps you consider your environment more.
- But clearly there is also a cost (so, three things came to mind. sue me!). The cost would be stickers on my junk. I generally don't like that.
So call the cost and the value of the process a wash and you are left with 'can I get the value of the information without the cost or at a substantially lower cost?' That is, I think, an argument for AR. I'd love a version of this where I could tag a lot of things and gather my own usage data without putting stickers on my stuff. How often did I wear x, or use y? Did I actually eat 4k calories in fried chicken two weeks ago? Of course the privacy concerns here are the main stopper for me but when local compute is cheap enough AR tagging, like these dots, is something I definitely would try.
I like to write commentary in the margins, so the dots help me know which books are "devalued" and which are fine to donate or loan out to others.
Multiple dots are an indication I return to a book often. Each time I re-read I take notes in a different ink color and try to record the date in that ink color in the front matter.
Oh man, tangent into one of my favorite library book experiences. I checked out a sci-fi book at the library. It was good I was enjoying it. Then a few chapters in, I found a previous library patron had written nit-picky notes in the margin, poking holes in the author's fictional science tech explanations. And these weren't little one-word exclamations, they were whole sentences written in perfectly legible, almost impossibly-tiny pencil handwriting. Some of them even had little drawn diagrams! It went through the whole book, every hundred pages or so some little margin notes about how such-and-such sci-fi babble didn't reflect how space-time actually works or whatever. It was a hoot, a little bonus on top of the book itself.
This was a special treat because the book itself already uses copious footnotes and cross-references from fictional characters to create a maze. And now a real person added to the effect by trying to make sense of it themselves.
If you are auditing the count you can see everything was counted. If you find an old dusty box you know why it is not in the system. If you are looking for slow moving stock, find the ones with lots of dots. Even with electronic systems it is not uncommon to find rotation (First In First Out) is not working.
Now I'm thinking about the boxes of electronic components in my own garage. Clear boxes, labelled on the front, bags inside, just like the article... and untouched year after year! It just feels so good when a psu breaks and you pull a capacitor and replace it with one you had already on hand...
A bit like the tons of computer hardware I used to hoard, only to find it was always the wrong form factor, the wrong cables etc.
(I would have appreciated less AI-assistance in the prose though FWIW, I'm sorry if that's annoying to say!)
You have 10 containers, slap a marker on one every time you take something out of it.
12 months later you have 2 containers that haven't been touched (zero stickers). -> 80% reduction of the amount of stuff to comb through to find unused/useless cruft.
But that's a pretty coarse decision procedure, both because there might be an item that's very important but gets used less than once per year and because there might be a container that is 99% full of unused stuff but happens to have 1 item that gets used once a year.
For me it’s about getting into the mode of going through and parting with stuff.
They stack, and I am lazy, and so I put the one I just pulled out from the middle of the stack back on top. So the ones on top are the ones I use. If they are at the bottom they don't get used much.
On the other hand, I don't care which ones I use a lot as I am not trying find candidates for eviction. I just care about not having to pull items out of the bottom of a stack of five shoeboxes. It happens, because frequency != importance.
Also, the annoying thing about collecting dusty components is that you won’t need it most of the time… until you do.
The unitasker advice is also a bit difficult for inexperienced people to follow, from what I've seen. A stand mixer is a great multitasker on paper, whereas a speed peeler does exactly one thing. Yet the latter will be used massively more often than the former in most kitchens. Probably the most used tool in my kitchen (after knives and cutting boards) is the kettle, another unitasker.
It's especially a problem for people with ADHD, because the "very sorted and hidden" mode of organizing is heavily socialized as the _only_ way to be organized, but it's also the exact opposite of how (some) ADHD brains want to operate. OTOH the very exposed and "emergent" organization that works for an ADHD brain probably is mild torture to an OCD brain :)
For myself, the sorting system in this post looks pretty ideal. All the stuff is right there where I can see it and scan for what I'm after, it explicitly allows for emergent organization where classification happens incrementally over time, and the dots thing has near zero activation energy but still gives me long-term information I can use. It's much better than an electronic or "clean" inventory system precisely because I'll never be able to consistently keep using those, whereas slapping a dot on a box, even on bad brain days I can manage that!
In some circles perhaps. I'm more of a fan of Adam Savage's First Order Retrievability - an overly fancy term for a pretty simple concept. There's certainly large swaths of folks that adopt that vs the everything-in-a-drawer approach, especially in workplaces where otherwise it would just cause entirely too much friction for common operations.
I give myself a lot of grief for a messy workshop, but it is nice once you realize there's a lot of ways to be organized and it's a very personal process. The important part is to devote a bit of time and energy to it, and to slowly pay down the organizational debt. And to let go of the perfectionism!
At the end of the day, if someone doesn't like my open workspace style, they probably don't value working the way I do, and I'm ok with that.
And I put them in the crawl space :)
Little systems like this are so useful. For example, I have a similar system for clothes hanging in my closet. Shirts hang on the left side of the bar, trousers on the right. Empty hangers go into the middle. Clean clothes are always placed into the middle on the appropriate side. Whenever I pull something out to wear, I choose from the ends, not the middle.
This does two things: First, I'm cycling my clothes a little more fairly instead of wearing the same stuff over and over (the DS&A nerds among you would call this an LRU cache, I guess). Second, clothes that I don't like so much or just don't use, for whatever reason, get pushed to the ends, and every year I pull out the stuff that's been stuck at the ends for a while and donate it to charity, without a moment's thought.
More like a FIFO buffer. But you probably don't strictly enforce the rotation - you might still pick a preferred garment over the one on the end, I am guessing. So kind of like a network queue that might prioritize some packets - er, garments - over others.
For small common components (diode, resistor, LED) though I prefer the traditional wall-mounted array of trays for sorting by values. Also, my commonly used tools and supplies (soldering, cutting...) live in other wall mounted open top bins (like the stereotypical "mechanic's shop" kind that hook on at the rear).
I have a rare brand loyalty for the brand of box I use - only the "Really Useful" stacking boxes. Clear, robust, and the different sizes have lips to stack and tile on each other. Who knew that a simple storage box could have an ecosystem.
Same here. I've been using them at home and work for years and they are absolutely fantastic; we've probably got well over 100 and it's rare for one a year to break and even then it's usually just the lid.
I think they've been very clever in how they manage their range. I generally use the 12L and 18L boxes, but I don't need to remember any dimensions because a different profile box would say be 11L or 19L. All you need to do is remember the capacity and it'll be the right matching box.
I'm trying to get to a place where I think of all my purchases as rentals. That it's OK, if justified, that a tool served its purpose one time, and if it doesn't get used again or goes to the donation center, I have received the benefit. Something that can be reused is then just bonus. If not reused by me, then at least, someone else can benefit from the good.
Switching my mental thinking to "renting" instead of buying items has help me be able to get rid of items which I haven't used in some time, reducing my footprint. I have a long way to go, but I come from a family of clutterbugs and it's just kind of baked in.
Dots would be useful in my scenario just to capture utility of everyday things.
I regretted throwing out a thing like that maybe once.
Don't do it to "insurance" items like a fire extinguisher or a drain snake.
Now, what happened to me more often was: losing a thing, doing an extensive search for it, not finding it, buying a replacement, and then finding the original item the day after.
> I was looking for something simple. Something right-sized for my scale.
> Clear boxes don't have this problem. They scale.
> That's not a failure. That's the system working.
I wonder if there's a simple regex that could detect these. Perhaps I should ask Claude
The entirety of this post could be explained in 20 tokens: 1) use transparent boxes and bags for organizing 2) track the usage with stickers 3) remove rarely accessed boxes
We need a sponsorblock-style crowdsourced solution against such slop. Meanwhile I'm just blocking offenders' domains on all of my networks
One product many have at home (if they've got a wife or if they're a woman): nail polish remover. This is a magical tool for it's ubiquitous. Sure, you can go and buy the proper stuff: but this one many already have some at home.
It works also should sticky stuff fall from trees on your car's windshield (do not use it on the car paint). It's really miracle stuff.
I also "steal" my wife's nail polish itself: I love to put marks on components so I know where they should be plugged. Even on my guns: there are pins that go one side but the other (say the two pins to take apart the lower and upper receiver of many rifles), so I mark them with nail polish from different colors. Cables on motherboard? Color code with nail polish: both on the mobo and on the cable.
Now you don't it to attack the plastic of the box: quickly wipe the sticky gum then clean it with some water.
Besides that from TFA:
> The first thing I did was get rid of every opaque container I owned. Every toolbox, every parts organizer with little pockets, anything I couldn't see through.
I saw a friend of mine doing that 25 years ago and immediately adopted that technique.
Acetone can damage and melt certain plastics. It can cause clear plastic to become cloudy. Using a hair dryer to soften the adhesive, or a bottle of Goo Gone, is often a better alternative for peeling off stickers.
My bins are stacked like in the article's photos. When I am done with a bin, it goes on the top. Least recently accessed bin is on the bottom. I need to get better about cache eviction though.
This also works with clothing on a rack. Put clean clothes on the left. Choose what to wear from the right. Eventually, the things you don't like wearing will all be on the right. This also happens to sort clothes by season.
That's a hell of a collection. Is there any risk of them degrading over time, as they're organic?
I'd have maybe used different colored dots, e.g. N blue, then remove them and place 1 green etc. as a counter and so on.
I've switched to UTZ Rako/Euroboxes for longer term storage. I even bought a beat-up dolly so I could easily transport 60L boxes around. They stack, they're divisible (e.g. 2x30L on top of a 60L) and the smaller ones fit neatly into a KALLAX cubby. You can buy them used for cheap, if you're willing to spend an afternoon scrubbing factory dirt off them. But they're not significantly pricier than Really Useful.
There are other suppliers like Auer, who make all kinds of interesting variations like toolboxes and latching/lockable boxes, but can get really expensive. You can get insert containers for them, but same problem: no transparent lids, only generic gray unless you want to buy 100.
I've been lusting after some of the Sortimo boxes that Adam Savage recommends, but I can't justify 50-100 quid per compartment box.
As for the original article... I like the idea of dots, but I would try a gridded label with sharpie marks. Having worked in a lot of workshops and labs though, boxes are not efficient. You want a good rack/drawers for things you use all the time (tape). I do like one box per project for convenience, which is often more useful than a box with generic grouped parts. If you really need to, you can do things like cut SMD tapes for each project. This way is much easier to drop back into something you only have time for on the weekend, and it's also what we would do in hardware shops (single sorted organizer with the BOM items for a project).
I do agree about the hardware side being surprising. When I was working on electronics for work, having a 4 channel scope was indispensable. But most of the time, debugging on chip/breakpoints are enough. I switched to a 4 channel mixed signal Picoscope.
(Someone else mentioned kitchen containers. I spent some time in a professional kitchen which hooked me on Cambro-style containers, or whatever Nisbet's sell in the UK. Also standardized alu sheet pans and matching silicone mats for baking.)
Things that are subject to a lot of wear and tear and handled a lot will not work well with dots as they will come off, but I don't find that to be a problem for the front of storage boxes so it works for me.
While I don't have an electronic system for tracking parts bins, the one exception is parts I place on PBCs. This is a small subset of my total parts and to track them I have an electronic database that's much more rigorous, tracking part numbers, data sheets, footprints, symbols, and it is much closer to the kind of part database that a site like digikey would use than the dot system.
I don't need dots to track parts I put on PCBs because I can do that all programmatically to scan the files and see what parts I place the most often.
I don't quite know what you mean with your question about whether it would be useful if I didn't have dot totals but still tracked them. I do find the dot totals to be useful, and comparing across years also helps me identify things that were used a lot, but maybe only two years ago. Stuff like glue and magnets seem timeless and are used constantly every year though.
Decathlon and Zara both have RFID tags in their products.
https://sustainability.decathlon.com/product-traceability-an... (Decathlon)
https://www.inditex.com/itxcomweb/so/en/press/news-detail/7f... (Inditex is the parent company of Zara. Link is a press release from 2014.)
So if one were to buy all their clothes at Decathlon (clothes for sports and other outdoor activities) and Zara (everyday wear as well as fancier clothing), and found a reader that can read the RFID tags they use, one would save the time needed to add RFID tags to one’s clothes ;)
There might be other stores that have RFID tags on all of their products too. I only mention these two in particular because I have purchased products from both of them using their RFID-based self-checkout in their stores and thus seen it first-hand.
However, I am not sure if all of the products have the RFID label embedded in the actual fabric or if some or most have the RFID label attached to paper labels that you’d remove before using the clothes. So that would also need to be determined before deciding to replace one’s whole wardrobe with clothes exclusively from these stores.
It's such a shame too because the author clearly cares about sharing their system, they went to the lengths of taking nice photos etc. - but then it's this low quality, meandering, repetitive, predictable AI writing.
It's also surprising to see that most people in the comments here just do not seem to be affected one bit. Not sure if it's because it's become so standard now that everyone's completely accepted that this is what content is going to be from now on... or if most people just don't care about poor writing.
The second hypothesis seems less likely given how central to the ethos of this board pg's old essays about good writing seem to be, but maybe that's just a bygone era.
And seeing every day this kind of crap at the top of the front page of the websites I used to love, with hundreds of comments of intelligent people not even noticing all this useless AI slop... Very sad future ahead.
> It wasn't the specialized components. It wasn't the sensors I had so many of.
> These aren't the exciting parts. They're the infrastructure that every project shares.
And it's astounding. Because this is awful writing.
Author, one year ago: "you replied to an LLM generated comment. if you look at the posting history you can confirm it"
Now they can't be bothered to take an edit pass on the most rote slop.
Can you describe what you think is awful (beyond rhetorical choices that have become LLM markers)?
I also track historical movements to see which items are never used.
Recently I've moved towards everything being stored in numbered bags, which are hung in order on a line for O(N) retrieval. For storage it tells you which bag to put it in, for retrieval it tells you where it is.
I'm thinking more and more the optimal system will have a physical as well as digital component.
Also, I feel this system would be great for shared workshops at work places and maker spaces etc. I was just rummaging through our lab at work today, there's so many parts in the lab no one would know about, if it was inventorised with a good integrated (AI?) search function the equipment could be much more useful/available.
So $20 fee to pay for getting rid of a bunch of other cables I didn't need years ago and saving ~500 cubic cm of space.
And I gave the printer cable away to a friend when I was done with it, happy to repurchase it in a few years in the increasingly unlikely scenario that I need it again.
Keep a few extra cables of sorts I actually use fairly often (a few spare HDMI cables, some ethernet cables, and a few types of USB cables are no-brainers, for instance). Toss all the rest (am I ever, ever going to use a DVI cable again in my life? Decent odds, no, and on the off chance I do I can just buy another)
Any cable that's more than ~2 spares for a port on some device that is plugged in or otherwise in-use in your house, or isn't a kind of port you've used in a couple years (even if you could) should at least get some serious scrutiny and more often than not be donated or go in the trash.
Like, I held on to a couple coax cables more than ten years after the last time I plugged anything into a coax jack. So stupid, in hindsight.
It depends entirely on usage patterns and attitudes.
I just used a piece of material that was sitting on the shelf for at least ten and probably closer to fifteen years. I'd purchased it as an off-cut from a supplier just on a thought of "this might be useful, and it's a good deal". Carried it through two moves and never got around to using it. Suddenly it turned out to be the perfect thickness for this one customer project when the expected material didn't work — never could have predicted it. Not only that, but when I went to check how much it would cost today, I literally cannot find that particular thickness. It literally saved by butt on this job.
OTOH, I do have other materials I've used once or twice, but the needs have shifted so they're going on Craigslist for free.
25 year old buys a knife set he didn't really need because it's on sale 50% off.
If he invested that $49, eventually it's worth $200. So buying it costs $200 by the time he's old, and clutter for 40 years.
No, I won't throw stuff away all willy-nilly.
What I tried to convey is that the dot system is good at reducing the amount of stuff you need to go through and make the Marie Kondo decision of "does this spark joy" or "is this a rare tool that's hard to find if I throw it away now and need it 5 years from now".
Like I have my grandfather's wood carving tools. Do I carve wood? No. Might I when I retire. Certainly. They're _VERY_ high quality tools so if I throw them out, I'd need to either spend an inordinate amount of money to get ones of similar workmanship or make do with some chinesium crap with plastic handles.
Then we did the main move (a LOT less stuff to move) and kept the storage unit for a bit over a year, going there to grab stuff as needed.
After that we sold, donated and/or threw away pretty much everything in there. So much useless crap we were bringing along "just because".
I'm assuming you're the original author: the problem is the LLM markers.
But its bigger than you're thinking, I think, otherwise you wouldn't have done what you did.
No matter the discipline, painting, code, etc., people appreciate things that are unique and require unique effort.
You can see this over and over again in art history, and the products / code we appreciate are things share that property.
LLMs are great tools, you should use them. Problem was when it turned into (I'm guessing, because this is what I do) "I wrote too much...god I hate my writing...LLM, do your magic...LGTM! So much shorter and cleaner!"
The failure mode I'm seeing with people posting obvious slop who otherwise wouldn't want to is, the editing makes things shorter but it also tends to make everything repetitive, both locally and across across the essay.
Locally, to the person operating the LLM, it looks like "its so much more approachable!", to a reader, it reads as "the author things I am very dumb and takes 3 sentences to saying something that was 4 words"
Please don't take it personally, btw. We're between a rock & a hard place right now and it's important to tease things like this out over time. I'd rather have an extended dialogue about it, but...in practice, people absorb microsignals about what's appropriate over time. Better to say "It's awful writing" then write an extended essay empathizing via guessing what was in your head and what you actually did.
I enjoyed the essay and it's an interesting idea and right up my alley. It's just a pitch perfect example of something going bad, "I had problem X, it was solved via boxes and stickers" has to be 600 words, tops. And you probably sensed that when you were done, I'm assuming. Just needed to go farther rather than lean into sense of relief.
But I appreciate the elaboration. I don't generally use LLMs for writing, but I'm interested in what people perceive as good and the gap between that LLM output among other things. I actually liked this piece, and could outline some things that I thought were effective about it as is, but being curious about what other people dislike seemed more likely to be educational.
I especially appreciate the criticism of repetition in this piece and LLM output in general. That's a great one to think about because repetition has a place in rhetoric, especially with some audiences, but probably less so with other audiences (perhaps especially an engineering minded audience). And for any audience there will be a point of diminishing returns. All things LLMs may be poorly positioned to dial in.
> Better to say "It's awful writing" then write an extended essay empathizing via guessing what was in your head and what you actually did.
But you did! Thank you. And FWIW the extended criticism that you eventually provided including attempting to guess at the author's perspective boosts signal for me. When someone does that, it gives me particulars to learn from and makes it seem less likely they're just cranky or grinding an unknown axe. Though of course no one has time for essay responses all the time (and the pay usually isn't great).
At least that was my experience when I was looking for an organisation system -and gave up =)
Idk about the drama, I just get stuff done and keep going.
A huge number of items at Walmart, Kohls, Target, Academy, Old Navy, and many other stores now (those are just the ones I've seen in store.)
Look for the 'EPC' logo, GS1 is the same standards body that controls the UPC barcode numbering.
https://www.gs1.org/standards/rfid/guidelines
Though - you don't want to use those types for this application, they are too long distance / not selective enough, and the readers are expensive.
Buy a big pack of NFC stickers instead, or print up some QR codes.
I would say that Decathlon stuff has the RFID inside the internal labels (the ones that you should cut off if you don't want them to scratch your skin but sometimes you don't notice them)
