I like how quickly this got dismissed as speculation as though we don't live in an age where election tampering and manipulation of public opinion for political reasons are so commonplace that incidents of it just blend in with the other forgettable global headlines.
Parties were not called out and a large amount of ensuing Othering is happening anyway. Arguably, that proves that the EFF was sound in their decision to mitigate that by not calling out the parties/politicians in hopes to keep the focus on the bill itself, doesn't it? I've long suspected that we humans tend to lose the plot so often because we want to immediately sort everyone into buckets as though compartmentalizing them brings about complete understanding of the issue on the table.
Can you give us an example of a new idea that is not derivative of something that already exists? Should only take about a minute.
Snark aside (and apologies), there's absolutely nothing wrong with the "no new ideas" take and nobody should think there is. Humans tend to work collectively, try as we might to do or appear otherwise, and often come to the same conclusions through reasoning and logic. No one-person truly invented the light bulb, etc, when really all inventive thought is branches of derivative thought as we build our collective knowledgebase. A better question would be how many novel ideas are the logical conclusion of branches of derivative thought and how many are tangential brought about by the injection of our irrationally.
Didn't really think about tenting it, thanks for explaining. I don't game or watch much media beyond the occasional how-to on YouTube, so the usefulness was lost on me. Appreciate the perspective, since I frequently get asked "which computer should I buy for X" IRL because I'm the local crufty computer guy, I guess.
"Tech giant Microsoft announced today it plans to build a useful quantum computer in just 3 years"
Leading with this dubious claim is fine comedy. Microsoft can barely build a useful conventional computer that runs its own platform and associated products. The Surface Book 3's being used at my job all launch Teams, Excel and Outlook like they're perpetually struggling to get out of bed. The Surface Pros have display issues minutes out of the box. This foolish Dash to Quantum will result in a lot of disappointment as unreliable rushed-to-market hardware is tauted by companies like Microsoft that are historically fond of doing just that.
And no, I don't think quantum computing is all hype. There is definitely meat on the bone, even if it only returns us to the somewhat annoying days of time sharing that most HN readers are probably too young to remember. But these idiots are fueling the hype train for the sake of quick-buck valuation, puffing for an audience that is increasingly tired of over-promising and under-delivering to the point where we will finally have an actual quantum computer and nobody will give a shit, especially after this whole AI circus has continued to prove itself an expensive pagent full of mummers and gimmicks.
I've been to a lot of countries (and thus through a lot of customs agents), the most they ever ask me to do, if anything at all, is turn the laptop on. I think the point is they want to make sure it's an actual laptop and not just a shell hiding something else. I've never had an agent touch my machine or show any interest in doing so, and I say that as someone who gets the extra searches often because I carry a lot of odd looking parts and small tools for work. Just pointing that out because I think the paranoia about what customs agents are allowed to do is a bit overblown unless you're suspected of smuggling or transporting something nefarious. They're not interested in what's on your laptop until you give them a reason to be.
The Surface Book or whatever is going to be your best option because you want the 2-in-1 features. We had a few at my job before I switched to an XPS 13 since I never used it as a tablet and it was a weighty thing to have in my bag. Didn't hate using it like a laptop, though. Unfortunately, the price tag is also going to reflect the branding, so it won't be cheap. Same thing with a Lenovo Yoga or X13. That kind of functionality with good hardware is almost always going be pricy, I guess.
Can I ask why you want 2-in-1? I've personally never found the convert-to-tablet useful, and I have to imagine only visual artists might. I bought a nice case with a keyboard for my iPad Mini thinking I'd use it as a tiny laptop on the go, but in all honesty, I forgot the keyboard existed until I started typing this.
Not knocking your needs, just curious what kind of user those are for since I am obviously not the market
As someone who always favors the smaller laptops that don't require me to gear up an entire backpack just to do a bit of work on the go, I'd argue that the difference between a 10" and 13" screen is not nearly as much as it sounds. I've found the Dell XPS 13's to be an excellent choice for stowing in my service bag so I have a small-but-functional machine on a job site. That and the Dell XPS 13 just has better hardware all around, when stood up against the Chuwi.
15", sure, that's a bit big, but smaller models are available.
Agreed. Being in the Midwest US, my intake also varies widely, depending on weather or season, physical activity, and the foods I've been eating.
I'm not entirely dismissive of doctors, be they European or American, as most I've encountered do have the patient's best interest at heart. But they are also human, and it is very easy to stick with the safe and easy answer rather than do the work to find the real answer. So when I hear claims like that, I immediately doubt them, assuming it is placeholder information because we do not know the actual answer. Unfortunately, a lot of our media in the US considers such "placeholder information" to be actionable, and ends up convincing the public (including doctors) of its veracity.
Are we sure this is not just harmless and arbitrary information being parroted? Do we have verifiable sources other that anecdote? I find it hard to believe that there is just a single value for water intake across the massive biological spectrum that is humanity and expect to see a range when this conversation comes up. You're also getting water from foods, which I am sure is not being accounted for. Reminds me of the 10k steps a day that just happened to be "correct enough" to be believed and acted on. The truth is much more nuanced and depends on a number of factors in a person's physical health.
Without concrete verifiable findings, the best we can do is learn to pay attention to our bodies and drink maybe a little bit more water than we think we need to.
I agree, but in fairness, I don't know of any brand, tech or otherwise, that can completely wall itself off against insider threats. No matter how vigilant you are, someone who knows exactly how you move will find a way around you.
I did the same thing, but realized I was contributing to the problem. If a web app requires Chrome for full functionality, then us switching browsers is giving them permission to continue and expand their invasive practices.
These days, I just navigate away from anything that demands I use Chrome "for best results." One of the sites for a local utility company does this, so instead I just call monthly and pay or manage my service by phone. I'm old enough to remember when that was the preferred way after mailing personal cheques went the way of the dodo, so it does not feel that inconvenient to me, but I can see where it might for other people. Still, nobody said the fight to regaining our agency online would be easy. Or convenient.
Putting everything on a spectrum is what got us into this mess of zero regulation and moving goal posts. It's slippery slope thinking no matter which way we cut it, because every time someone calls for a stop sign to be put up after giving an inch, the very people who would have to stop will argue tirelessly for the extra mile.
Right. But HN, among other platforms, is full of users who will confidently run their mouths about something they don't fully understand while believing they do. I think the previous commenter was being too shy in pointing out that even exceptionally smart people sometimes forget where the limits of their own knowledge are, not to mention consider themselves immune to any propaganda that surrounds the subject at hand.
They could admittedly be more defined, but I think the original commenter missed a key word. It really boils down to whether or not you are offloading your critical thinking.
The word "thinking" can be a bit nebulous in these conversations, and critical thinking perhaps even more ambiguously defined, so before we discuss that, we need to define it. I go with the Merriam-Webster definition: the act or practice of thinking critically (as by applying reason and questioning assumptions) in order to solve problems, evaluate information, discern biases, etc.
LLMs seem to be able to mimic this, particularly to those who have no clue what it means when we call an LLM a "stochastic parrot" or some equally esoteric term. At first I was baffled that anyone really thought that LLMs could somehow apply reason or discern its own biases but I had to take a step back and look at how that public perception was shaped to see what these people were seeing. LLMs, generative AI, ML, etc are all extremely complex things. Couple that with the pervasive notion that thinking is hard and you have a massive pool of consumers who are only too happy to offload some of that thinking on to something they may not fully understand but were promised that it would do what they wanted, which is make their daily lives a bit easier.
We always get snagged by things that promise us convenience or offer to help us do less work. It's pretty human to desire both of those things, but proving to be an Achilles Heel for many. How we characterize AI determines our expectations of it; so do you think of it as a bag of tools you can use to complete tasks? Or is it the whole factory assembly line where you can push a few buttons and an pseudo-finished product comes out the other side?
I am, under the right circumstance. I'm not a pacificist, at least not historically. Although, we can banter all day with tough words, but the reality is that none of us can really predict how we will react to a situation until we are in it.