https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=502960
--- Comment #38 from R. Horvat <[email protected]> --- (In reply to maxycatz from comment #36) > (In reply to Roke Julian Lockhart Beedell from comment #35) > > (In reply to maxycatz from comment #34) > > > > Thanks, but any of us can ask an LLM. > Julian, I understand his reaction because I have experienced similar treatment when I was reporting Firefox bug a few years ago. They cut me short like I was some unwelcomed guest, instead of affirming me as a user and owning their shortcomings about not reading the SVG 1.0 specifications properly. Never tried again and changed browsers. Now they destroyed Firefox for good (less than 1% users). I know that LLMs can be a plague sometimes, but perhaps an affirming tone to the user would be nice ;) even if they are not right :) > Fine, Claude helped me find why the journal was getting spammed by drkronqi > and provided a solution for me that I would not have known how to even start > approaching. Claude suggested adding to this bug report and provided the > comment based on what was found in trying to solve this; I could not have > rationally explained the resolution as system queries were made that I have > not used before and I am new to KDE. > > If the solution is so 'easy' that an LLM can find the solution, why is this > 'bug' still creating issues for user. And with jerk off remarks such as > yours, I won't be posting again. Thank you for reporting this, but I solved this for me and perhaps some other people by decreasing the logging verbosity of the beforementioned service. Of course that a deeper understanding of the source of the problem is most welcome :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
