This post mortem is sort of classically underdone. It describes a step that was taken that was in the path of the error, but is not the root cause. The root cause here is not "we copy pasted from chat gpt and it hallucinates", but rather a "our systems allowed this failure to get to production". Which in turn should be met with why? Because we didn't have tests or qa that covers this path. Why?
Keep. Asking. Why.
ChatGPT didn't fail, your system allowed ChatGPT to fail. Answering why is the interesting thing to discuss and blog about.
Tiling is defined as "preparing and cultivating the land". Cultivation is defined as "breaking up the soil in preparation for sowing or planting". Aeration will absolutely break up the soil. That's kind of the whole reason for doing it. It is cultivation, and therefore associated with tiling.
Aeration is not by the same mechanical process as the tool known as a cultivator, if that's what you were thinking of, but that specific tool is not what tiling/cultivation refers to specifically.
Tilling, in gardening, usually refers to lifting spadefuls of soil up and out of the ground, turning them over and breaking up the clumps. It's like a kitchen aid stand mixer on your soil.
Aeration with a broad fork doesn't lift the soil out of the ground and definitely doesn't break it up and redistribute it. It just creates a few pockets of stretched space by inserting a fork and wiggling a bit. Yes, small pockets are disturbed by the fork but mostly the soil stays as it was.
> Tilling, in gardening, usually refers to lifting spadefuls of soil up and out of the ground, turning them over and breaking up the clumps.
I expect you mean that lifting spadefuls of soil up and out of the ground is usually referred to as tiling, rather than the other way around. Which stands to reason as that is perfectly consistent with the dictionary defection.
> Aeration with a broad fork doesn't lift the soil out of the ground and definitely doesn't break it up
Aeration does not lift the soil, but it absolutely breaks it. That is why one would consider practicing aeration – to break up soil compaction that may be present. Cultivation, and therefore tiling, says nothing about lifting or redistribution, only breaking. Aeration is also tiling if done for the sake of ground preparation.
Have you use a broad fork? It's like 4-6 blades spread across ~4 feet. The mechanism of action is totally different, and no, it does not break up the soil in the same way tilling with a spade or rototiller does.
If you are here only to argue semantic and prescriptivist use of language, you can stop responding. I'm not interested. You might be right according to some dictionary definition of these terms. In practical use by gardeners, however, these two techniques have different names and achieve different goals and only one is called tilling.
>Have you use a broad fork? It's like 4-6 blades spread across ~4 feet. The mechanism of action is totally different, and no, it does not break up the soil in the same way tilling with a spade or rototiller does.
Aeration is not conventional tillage. Conventional tillage sees soil lifted and mixed as described earlier. A lazy speaker may leave out "conventional" in casual conversation about the mechanical practice where it is understood by context. Such context was not found here, but is that, perhaps, the source of your confusion?
You keep saying it's my confusion. My friend, there is no lazy speaker. It is merely the accepted and understood use of the term in casual conversation.
I understand your semantic argument, there is no confusion, I simply believe language is not prescriptivist. If people use the words in a certain way, then that is an acceptable way to use the words. No argument from a position of "well actually, the dictionary/professional jargon says..." will sway me because I just don't care.
> If people use the words in a certain way, then that is an acceptable way to use the words.
Of course, and luckily for us the original link explicitly states that no-till is being used in the farming sense, so we know exactly what certain way the words are being used. No-till in farming comes with a precise definition.
Even if you are right that there is some alternative reality in gardening where tillage commonly means something completely different, that clearly doesn't apply here. In farming, aeration before seeding/planting would not be considered a no-till practice. Such an act would normally fall under what is known as minimum tillage.
> I simply believe language is not prescriptivist.
Ironically, the thread went off the rails only because you tried to prescribe an alternative, incompatible, definition onto the communication that had already taken place. Credit to you for at least recognizing the error of your ways, even if you do seem to want to sweep the initial confusion under the rug for some reason.
Huh? Clearly you won – you got to learn something. I am the one who lost. Respectfully, thinking things through isn't your strong suit, is it?
> I'll go tell all my gardening buds that the no till practices are "um actually, that's tilling".
Whatever floats your boat, but let me warn you: Unless your gardening buds are high on the "gardened bud", they are not going to buy into your idea that no-till means "to perform tillage" any more than we have, even if you are perfectly free and able to hold that view. No-till is literally the abbreviation of "no tillage".
Yeah, I don't get the no till. The soils in my area are so compact that your % of successful seed germination will be much lower without that effort. I have a small plot that I manually till up a couple of inches deep each season and then mix in the compost I've been making all year. My germination success rate is much much higher that way
Seems like tilling might be counterproductive long-term then:
> Tilling and plowing are almost synonymous with land cultivation, aren't they? Yet they actually destroy soil structure, create compaction, and kill the very soil biology that's the basis of fertility, like fungal networks and all those earthworms that make the soil nice and squishy.
> According to the Michigan State University Extension, compaction is also a common side effect of tillage – at the soil surface, the plow layer and the subsoil.
The point is to build, over years, the kind of soil that fosters germination. You can mix in additives every year and till, or you can build a small ecosystem over time.
Maximizing the ecosystem health of what's underneath the surface is the point.
I have some remote forest land I would love to set some sensors up on. I just need to know exactly what to buy to gather the data, power it with solar, and send the data back via cellular signal.
Unfortunately it's too remote to have any sort of internet signal beyond cellular at the moment.
I'd appreciate any and all ideas folks have, assuming I'm willing to drop a few grand without blinking.
Additionally, it's in an area with wildfire smoke part of the year and id love to have AQI monitoring.
I had some luck with ChatGPT. The model numbers are out of date but the general descriptions and capabilities of each brand aren't. And in general ChatGPT is good with prompts like "I want to do X, tell me all the things I should consider" - it has been trained on Q&A sites after all.
> It's expensive but we could absolutely produce green methane with renewable energy.
You don't even understand. The methane's mostly for the hydrogen, used to make ammonia or some other nitrogen compound. There are other ways of making this, Birkeland Eyde, for instance, but there like one third as efficient, at best. This means people starve. You might make the case that we could efficiently use livestock manure as a substitute (it's the green solution), but not if you're going to turn this into Planet Vegan. Given the necessity of animal manure, it's difficult to think that "get rid of all the livestock" stems from anything other than bizarre vegan tendencies.
If you absolutely have to get rid of the livestock, so be it, but then you really do need the fossil fuels. Pick, it's one or the other as far as I can tell.
> And there are natural fertilizer paths that aren't cattle.
Nope. You've got livestock (hogs, poultry, etc), or you've got fossil-fuel-based Haber-Bosch. I'm not even really aware of any science fiction concepts "other paths".
Green ammonia is already being commercially deployed by folks like Talus. Yes, we'd have to invest hard in renewables and nuclear, but it's absolutely achievable. Ammonia production is whole integer percent of global energy use, that's not an impossible number to supply with hydrogen.
Additionally, pulse crop rotation is increasingly being used to provide some free nitrogen to the soil.
Bioreactors with Azotobacter vinelandii are showing promise in providing nitrogen fixing in a reactor.
And like, industrial composting produces fertilizers with plenty of nitrogen. Soybeans, in particular, need no nitrogen inputs and produce plenty of both useful food and nitrogen containing plant matter.
Our wastewater also contains tons of nitrogen, both from biosolids and from agricultural runoff. These are difficult to get at safely, admittedly, but not impossible.
If you pause to think about it, all that manure needs to come from feedstock plus other inputs (water, etc). If you diverted that same feedstock into producing fertilizer (in the case of soybeans) or not producing at all (in the case of dent corn) you'd have plenty of material and a reduced demand. Manure doesn't just magically come from no inputs.
Nope. You've got livestock (hogs, poultry, etc), or you've got fossil-fuel-based Haber-Bosch. I'm not even really aware of any science fiction concepts "other paths".
The Haber-Bosch process needs hydrogen, as you said in your first paragraph. Hydrogen can be made directly from water by electrolysis with renewable or nuclear electricity. This was already done on an industrial scale in the 20th century, with hydroelectric power used to produce hydrogen for ammonia:
"1921–2021: A Century of Renewable Ammonia Synthesis"
> The Haber-Bosch process needs hydrogen, as you said in your first paragraph. Hydrogen can be made directly from water by electrolysis
Nice. You've just made one of the most energy-intensive necessary industrial processes even more energy intensive. Even while you're doing your best to demolish whatever baseload power we might still have.
> This was already done on an industrial scale in the 20th century, with hydroelectric power used to produce hydrogen for ammonia:
Got any spare hydroelectric? Any more rivers you want to dam up? Maybe you can decommission a few more nuke plants and replace them with brown coal.
It really depends on what you mean by treatment. Because therapy absolutely can ease things like anxiety, depression, and fear while building strategies for managing sensory processing issues, change anxiety, and executive functioning.
What about when people with Down's syndrome say they are living fulfilling lives? Obviously paternalistic "look how happy they are" is a shit take, but "I'm genuinely content with my life" from a person with Down's syndrome seems like a pretty important voice to listen to, surely.
If we structured society to provide that management and support, would that change your opinion? If the government offered community caregivers who would come and assist parents with autistic children, helping both ease the load and also teaching skills to the kids and parents, do you think that might change the calculus?
Our options aren't just "cure", and status quo. We can choose to adapt in other ways.
> If we structured society to provide that management and support, would that change your opinion?
Severely disabled people receive a lot of gov't support in most highly developed countries (G7 levels). I am confused by your question. Society already does this pretty well in these wealthy countries.
I've been through some shit due to my autism, including a period of homelessness and trauma. It's caused me massive amounts of pain over the decades, but... despite needing support to function, I'd still keep it.
I don't think it's necessarily wrong for people to say they are autistic and would stay autistic given the choice. I don't think it's wrong to say the opposite. I get much, much more uncomfortable when that choice is external. If my parents knew I would be autistic, they would have aborted me. I think I've been a force for good in the world even with my trauma. I dunno, that makes me sad to think about.
Keep. Asking. Why.
ChatGPT didn't fail, your system allowed ChatGPT to fail. Answering why is the interesting thing to discuss and blog about.