You mean like Netflix making shows “second-screen” friendly? I doubt lack of focus ever really drove longer articles. It pushes them shorter and more towards bulleted lists and headlines only if anything.

[Insert ad here. Lol.]

Padding out the paragraph count just gives more spots for ads in between or more eyeball time for banner ads, and even if a site isn’t explicitly going for that, all the journalists (real or not) and LLMs are just trained to only write that way now.

I can only speak for me, but as a nuclear proponent, I’ve always liked solar power too. I’m more just annoyed by the wider misconceptions about nuclear power that have held it back for decades.

Those links aren’t smoking guns.

The first details troubled rollout of software upgrades, “upgrades” being the key word. That’s really just the nature of complicated software development in general. The previous complete package of software is already up-to-task and running it longer than desired isn’t a huge issue.

The second says they can’t fix multiple problems simultaneously, which is again another common software development reality and a very different statement than not being able to fix things.

The third flat out says the opposite in that many fixes actually have been completed, just not all of them yet. It’s an adjacent issue, but the headline also frames the secret keeping as a bad thing when that’s just a sensible thing to do.

Technically, they’re both supersonic, not hypersonic, but yeah, that’s just semantics. The actual important detail is that the SR-71 is twice as fast (or more) as the F-35. There’s a lot of testing you can do with the former that’s just not possible with the latter.

The F-35 has nothing to do with this, but just to correct anyone’s misconceptions, F-35 loss and readiness rates only sound bad because that kind of coverage gets clicks/views. When you add back in the context of comparison to other aircraft and the total number of airframes produced and hours flown, the F-35 is actually performing great.

Please ALSO make a giant 7" one, Moto. Thank you!

It’s basically everything of importance or interest to me accumulated over at least a couple decades originally bookmarked in Firefox, migrated to Chrome, then later migrated back to Firefox.

There’s work stuff, recipes, tutorials, videos, music, game mods, character builds, resources saved for family and friends, recommendations, billing reminders, etc. I also use it as a more organized YouTube watchlist.

I’m sure I could knock out 75% of my bookmarks without it being a problem, but they’re organized well enough that there’s little benefit to pruning it all.

Bookmarks in mobile Firefox is another issue. Bookmark management is a massive chore. I end up keeping tabs around a lot longer in mobile just to avoid messing with it.

On desktop Firefox with the Bookmark Tab Here extension (native functionality I missed from Chrome), bookmarking and organizing a new page is just two clicks. I use that workflow extensively. Apparently I have over 7000 bookmarks all organized that way.

deleted by creator

If you think LLMs are good at anything, I am almost 100% certain to disagree with you about pretty much everything, to help you understand this distinction.

Depends on what you mean by “anything.” The current obsession in the tech world of trying to shove LLMs into the AGI box? Yeah, not a good fit. Pure language stuff like translation or brainstorming? Very useful. LLMs now even surpass DeepL.

why do I even feel the compulsion to preface by saying my bit about ai and llms?

I have a similar compulsion to clarify that my interest in LLMs centers mainly around local open-source models that can run on consumer hardware.

Yeah, it really sucks, because LLM tech itself is amazing. Quantifying language and ideas into what’s basically a massive queryable concept map is a huge achievement. What do the tech giants decide to do with that achievement? Shove it every little place it doesn’t belong making everyone hate it.

Oh well, I’ll keep backing up the interesting local open-source models people make and playing with them in the corner.

I think LLMs are an interesting technology. Of course, the output is inherently untrustworthy, and that rules out a ton of applications tech bros are trying to cram it into.

Possibly, but the AI they’ve got doing it is just bad. Even liking an innocuous comment like “you’re killing it, dude” is apparently enough to get banned.

I say there’s no reason to be hostile to someone still on Reddit. I check here first for most things, but there are many communities whose presence here is either anemic or nonexistent.

Then again, Reddit has always been a desktop first experience for me. I pretty much only use old.reddit.com, and my line in the sand will probably be when it dies.

Even having high-end enthusiast hardware, I want those devices as the baseline too. Whatever optimizations they do still apply over the whole hardware spectrum.

Also, you can technically say 2030 is less than 4 years away if you want to traumatize old people. Lol.

I don’t think LTT’s approach is bad exactly. I really just take issue with their argument that “there are thousands of ‘switching to Linux’ videos on YouTube, so we don’t need to cover that ground again.” It’s ignoring the fact that, for better or worse, they have the biggest audience and furthest reach in the space. There’s still room for “we’re approaching this like normies would,” but I really think they need to close it up with “if you want to do this, here’s how to do it right.”

Are you trolling or do you genuinely believe that? I remember the original too. YouTube is applying AI filters on many old videos and reuploads, and the end result is distrust of many videos we used to trust.

Ah, never read the books. Just figured I needed to expand my reasoning.

Counter-counterarguments.

That assumes the 999 are in a position to stop the 1. Assuming FTL travel/communication/detection is never possible, reaction ability is always going to be limited. A relativistic projectile aimed at a planet can be a silent civilization killer.

This is more about cautiously reacting to the possibility of hostility in the very high stakes scenario of first contact, not the confirmation of hostility. In the room analogy, we don’t know who has the gun, whether it’s truly 1 person or 0 or 100 or 500, if most or all of the 999 are blindfolded or willing to defend newcomers, whether overpowering the violent one(s) is actually possible due to everyone being spread out and any guns having functionally unlimited ammo, whether other people have already been taken out for just showing up or resisting, and whether all of the above even matters if the aggressor gets a kill shot off before any of the above takes effect.

Evolution is inherently a competition for limited resources with winners and losers, so violence innately comes with the territory. Even grass and trees are in a war for sunlight. The concept of peaceful cooperation may be common due to the individual specialization likely needed for a species to become space-fairing, but it’ll be a higher level, more abstract idea, and the universality of other species applying it more broadly cannot be assumed.

Regarding the first point, I think it just assumes the possibility for hostility, not the universality of it. If there’s a room with a thousand people and I know one person in the room has a gun and wants to kill me, I’m still going to hesitate to enter regardless of the 999.

Also, any intelligence that arises out of evolution is going to have at least the rough concept of violence.