write something that already exists so it doesn’t need to think
If something already exists, it shouldn’t need to be rewritten.
Doing otherwise is a sign that something has gone wrong.
That was the case before LLMs and it is still the case today.
You replied to someone establishing a premise (ebikes are not dangerous), then built a whole wall of text built upon that premise. If the premise is removed, everything else built upon it falls down.
The premise was flawed.
I pointed that out.
Anything built upon it becomes irrelevant. There’s as much point to go through the text built upon the flawed premise, as there is to keep trying to build upon it.
The physics is not, per se, relevant.
I will forever remember this day, the 8th of April 2026 when Zagorath discovered that when it came to traffic collisions: physics was not relevant.
Please remember me, the little person, in your acceptance speech to the Nobel Committee.
because ebikes are not capable of tearing around. They are pedal assist only, no throttle; limited to going 25 km/h while receiving motor assistance […] All ebikes do is making riding easier at the same or lower speeds than regular cyclists are doing
Alert: Viral Ragebait
Type: Faulty Argument
Alert: Faulty Reasoning
Type: Fallacy
A bike going 10km faster than an ebike is not more dangerous than the ebike.
The reverse is also true: An ebike going 10km slower than a bike does not make the ebike safer.
Reason: The ebike has more mass, which means there’s a lot more inertia getting transferred during a collision.
If the rewrite is based on something which has a license that your company can’t use, then the rewrite likely can’t be used either