| I'm excited to give this a try. Long story short, I worked through a series of concepts with a designer friend last year using GPT-3 with a similar target: longform. Our approach was not interactive, but rather that the need was for a batch mode, overnight tool. I'm not really interested in having yet another JS library interrupt my real-time flow, which is quite quick, but is easily interrupted and I feel like we're at an inflection point where between grammarly and gmail our flow is something we remark about having when we read Csikszentmihalyi 20 years ago. The results were pretty startling when using a corpus of text from a great writer, but less so with a smaller corpus of wanna-be David Foster Wallace work. The one part of this that caused me to pause is this: https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/2277... That is, the pre-order traversal vs. depth-first-search. I'm outta my depth here not having a PhD in data structures and algorithms. My point is that from an authoring and marketing perspective, it would be clearer to me as an outsider and consumer, if the animation writ large the difference in terms of node traversal. Even after reading the stack exchange, you can see that I'm not alone in parsing this as the comments indicate the confusion. Without turning this into a Turing lecture, there must be a prosthetic device for understanding the deeper, underlying infrastructure. Can you help? |
Now I guess is my time to learn. Why do you think grammarly and gmail help flow? If anything, those red lines make me lose my train of thought.
And finally, regarding DFS, seems like you're right! Fixed!
Once we release for writers, we're planning to tighten up the positioning and make the UX a bit more intuitive.