as fun as that sounds, my experience has been the polar opposite. if I let my mind drift, it's going to get cheap dopamine kicks from stupid YouTube videos all day.
You have an army of behavioral psychologists at Alphabet and Meta working against you; it's only fair to fight back.
Yeah, the problem with "not fighting it" is that you'll naturally do what feels the best in the moment, and having fun will always feel the best in the moment over doing something boring.
The fall only comes later when all your having fun leads to a lot of not having fun (work piles up, relationships sever, projects fail etc.) I find living in a certain amount of fear of fun is healthy. If I feel like I've been having fun for too long, I've probably been neglecting something important that is going to really ruin my fun later.
I say all this, as I scroll through HackerNews looking for hits of dopamine instead of continuing trying to fix the CI issues that have been paralyzing my work for almost a day now. That's not good to be a fun conversation in my 1-1 if I ignore it for much longer...
I was going to give credit to the direction Mozilla was taking here after their... questionable decisions in the past few year(s).
Only to see that this is neither generally available, nor can you use it without enabling telemetry. I don't know who makes these decisions inside Mozilla, but I just don't get it.
I think you can use it without enabling telemetry, due to a recent change:
> Previously, access to these changes required you to share technical and interraction data (telemetry) with Mozilla. However, as of Firefox version 148, you can opt into receiving remote improvements, even if you have opted out of sharing your telemetry or participating in our experimental studies.
I hate. Absolutely hate that you can't say anything directly anymore without sugarcoating stuff in HN. Downvotes follow. I mean, the hell is HN for then?
Even the most obvious stuff needs to be said like... I don't know... but it looks like Google might be slightly bad here.
---
The CEO literally paid her hell a lot of money while she sold MDN to competition. While Rust to competition. While market shared shrinked from 9% (or 7%, forgot the exact number) to where it's now. Citing - NO MONEY!!!
We still have her controlling Mozilla right even though she is not CEO? And apparently we are not supposed to criticise em.
Virtue signaling the hell out of all posts and stuff saying we are for the people and doing everything against their interests gets super tiring as well.
The thread is about a marketing piece where Mozilla plays their usual "look we're the good guys" spiel. Pointing at their dirty laundry (which they still try to hide instead of learning from their mistakes) is very much appropriate.
Narrowing it from "every post about Firefox" to "every post about Firefox doing something good" still leaves it tiring. That extension wasn't even a bad core idea, it was a bungle of implementation choices. Oh no they hid the ticket. The real criticism is bad management and while it's valid it really doesn't need to come up on every article.
> If you’re a Firefox user, you may have noticed a weird new extension that suddenly showed up in your browser this week.
> The extension is called “Looking Glass 1.0.3” and this is its description: MY REALITY IS JUST DIFFERENT FROM YOURS. Now that sounds ominous. It’s really not, though. It’s a promotional campaign between Firefox and the TV series Mr. Robot that brings an alternate reality game to your browser. This must have sounded like a great idea when somebody pitched it to Mozilla, but the backlash has been fierce.
Well you see Mozilla did one Bad Thing a decade ago and that's a good reason to continue using the Ad Industry's chosen web browser instead; The one that gained most of it's marketshare by taking a page out of the malware industry's books and paying Oracle to include Chrome in the Java installer, among many many others.
You could always tell they didn't mean to install chrome, because these people would also have a malware "Chrome" browser that installed through the exact same pathway.
The bug is still hidden to this day. And they have done many other bad things since then, including adding more ads to FF. And if you need to compare them against Chrome to make FF look good then you are only proving the point that they have lost the plot.
The extension did not do anything unless you put in a secret setting. It wasn't promoting anything.
If this had been a hardcoded easter egg there would have been no real complaints. But showing up as a mystery extension spooked some people, and then misreporting made it spread a lot further than if all the reporting was accurate.
Adds an effect to certain words on websites (like puppet, control, economy, robot), sends an extra header to red-wheelbarrow.com that changes what you see.
Dude, the existence of the extension was the promotion. And Mozilla was paid for it. And the bug report is still hidden showing they have not learned their lesson. Why are you defending bad behavior?
People weren't supposed to be finding it like that. I really don't think "oh what is this new firefox experiment?" was an intended promotional path. It was an extension because that was easier to do and isolate. That's why I'm defending the intent.
And I don't think the visibility of a bug report tells us whether they learned their lesson.
The thing that stands out to me with all of this is how little accountability there is left within the field.
Published a rip-off? "Sorry, Claude must have done this".
Published a shitty/wrong/insensitive/<insert other adjectives here> post somewhere? "Sorry, the AI wrote it"
Regardless of how we view LLMs as a whole, if you produce content with AI and publish it, you personally own every line of what you published. "Claude did it" cannot ever be a valid excuse.
I think this an incredibly important point. As soon as we devolve reposnsiblity to computer progams, society cedes control to the algorithm vendors.
Jeff Geerling was called out today for his clickbaity video entitled "Intel just matched Apple Silicon. Seriously.". Jeff's personal response was "I had three YouTube titles, this one got about 2x the watch time as the other two, so I let YT pick it."
Another commenter replied: "You are trying to launder responsibility for a clickbait title to a computer program." I think this exactly nailed the problem.
It's funny, I saw that YT video in my feed and instantly was turned off from ever wanting to click on it. I know there is a write up about it, so I'd rather read than watch. Esp knowing what I know now.
This is just finally bringing the magical "the computer did it" to the masses!
When companies like Amazon accept, warehouse, bill for and ship unsafe Chinese trash, well, at every step it was just a computer. Google, X and others will happily show state funded scam advertisements from fake accounts and there is no one accountable, because it's just the computer handling those.
Now with AI, everyone can claim this magical legal immunity for themselves.
My favorite is when they're clearly caught out so they move on to trying to minimise the use and optionally passively aggressively turn it back on you.
"I was genuinely only using Claude to make my writing clearer/redraft/to organize my thoughts because I can't write as well as you can"
The new one for me this week was someone claiming they write exactly like Claude does.
I think we're at the point where people are making the opposite conclusion from the premise: Let's let the computer make the decision because then we can't be held accountable.
> how little accountability there is left within the field.
I don't think it's limited to the tech field: it's stronger here, due to the proximity with the tech giants who are enabling Trump's bullshit, but he and all that goes on around him are the real center of it.
More broadly, it's been on the rise for a number of years now, due to the Republican Party doing its level best to eliminate accountability for anything their people do wrong—like, for instance, cozying up to Epstein and his ilk.
They've been promoting a culture of unaccountability, trying to destroy the very idea that we have obligations to each other...as opposed to the masses having obligations to do whatever our leaders tell us.
My biggest issue with elevators is that some places and hotels I‘ve been to use disconnected systems:
They have three elevators, but pressing one button only calls that specific elevator. So everyone presses all three buttons, meaning the three elevators basically turn into one.
I don‘t understand how this was ever signed off, but I‘ve seen it multiple times now...
Someone cheapened out is my guess. Group dispatch. That is having multiple elevators communicating with each other is added feature or was added box. Don't want to pay the extra. Don't get that feature.
In general my understanding is that every single cab is unit that can operate alone separate from any others. Then these are grouped together to operate more efficiently. But this is feature you need to buy. Going too cheap someone might choose not to.
of course you exist regardless of what you are doing. I think the term is just used because it is the most "plain" form of existing? Just being around and doing nothing else at all. I'm not sure the term used carries much weight.
Keen to hear other recommendations. My DELL screen is working quite nicely but has weird burn in problems when connected through a Thunderbolt dock. What other brands (apart from the insanely priced Apple screens) still make high quality, reputable screens?
I have had good success with my dell montiors over the years. Only problem is they are not created equal, they sell to every level, entry/cheap office/gamers/high end docks/color calibrated/etc. I have stuck to the ultrasharps (and paid for it) but have been happy. Check out https://www.rtings.com/
"Why" as in, why take lower margins when Moonshot currently can't service all the demand for the model anyways. Based on past models no one is going to massively undercut Moonshot: few have the chops to serve it as efficiently as Moonshot and of those few, most of them don't go for being the cheapest, they go for being fast + reliable (think Together, Fireworks).
You get what you pay for applies very much with how many axes there are to serving these increasingly large models.
-
And for "with what compute": as the value of a token goes up, what people are willing to pay for compute is going up.
Every once in a while I'll see a story about falling rental rates, but with even slightly more established clouds I've been seeing availability get worse and worse over time.
I'm pretty sure the only reason the highly informal indexes don't reflect this is because every neocloud trying to cash in on an NVIDIA Inception discount kicks off by selling unrealistically cheap compute for a bit.
Yeah, there are definitely valid contexts for hosting chat like this. E2EE has the benefit of not needing to trust the host, which I personally like but I can see this being fine or even wanted for lots of cases.
Super cool, especially that the code is annotated!
In case the author is reading: The decorative feather images are between 2MB to almost 5MB in size. Compression might be in order to save users time and bandwidth, and make the site look less broken while the images are partially loaded :)
It has simply become a "marker" for LLM style, so I'd argue authors caring about their text will now just use a different structure to get the meaning across. That's just part of being a writer. You can choose to write it, and it'll be correct, readers (including me) will just conclude its most likely an LLM and often stop reading.
You have an army of behavioral psychologists at Alphabet and Meta working against you; it's only fair to fight back.
reply