I'm all for reexamining how we use our time and I'm definitely trying to get myself off always looking St my phone when I'm not doing anything.

But why does that mean buying a new product? You can change your behavior by just not looking at those things. And when you do legitimately need to have your phone to check something, you can develop the discipline to do that one thing and then put it away. Just seems like the obvious move.

Same issue, pomade was the fix for me (wavy hair), until then I always just lived with my hair looking like shit until it reached the perfect balance of "unwashed enough to have some weight and texture on it, clean or dry shampooed enough to not look super unwashed".

He already wiggled out of this one. He said Ukraine shouldn't start a war it can't win and expect to buy missiles to make up for it. His base accepted this explanation despite it making no sense, his opposition was mad but couldn't stop this decision and so everyone just moved on once it happened.

We're not talking about an AI running a nuclear reactor, this article is about AI assistants on a personal phone. 0.001% failure rates for apps on your phone isn't that insane, and generally the only consequence of those failures would be you need to try a slightly different query. Tools like Alexa or Siri mishear user commands probably more than 0.001% of the time, and yet those tools have absolutely caught on for a significant amount of people.

The issue is that the failure rate of AI is high enough that you have to vet the outputs which typically requires about as much work as doing whatever you wanted the AI to do yourself, and using AI for creative things like art or videos is a fun novelty, but isn't something that you're doing regularly and so your phone trying to promote apps that you only want to use once in a blue moon is annoying. If AI were actually so useful you could query it with anything and 99.999% of the time get back exactly what you wanted, AI would absolutely become much more useful.

The clergy and worshippers said they enjoyed it, but agreed it wouldn’t replace services led by humans anytime soon.

“It was pretty entertaining and fun, but it didn’t feel like a Mass or a service. … It felt distant. I didn’t feel like they were talking to me,” Taru Nieminen told The Associated Press.

The Rev. Kari Kanala, the vicar at St. Paul’s, echoed her sentiment.

“The warmth of the people is what people need,” he said.

I mean, isn't that basically how every AI project goes? "It's a fun novelty, but actually expecting anything deeper from it always gives you a hollow experience"? Maybe we don't need to try doing everything with AI, maybe we can just assume it'll be the case and move on

I read his statements as attempts to make it clear he's not the unreasonable "everyone must give Ukraine all the aid we want with no compensation allowed" figure that conservatives in the US now want to paint him as. It makes it clear that Trump isn't upset that Zelenskyy isn't open to negotiating compensation for the US, he's just trying to find an excuse to pivot US foreign policy towards Russia's goals, and Zelenskyy meanwhile is even willing to discuss something as absurd as signing away Ukraine's rare earth minerals.

I think it's a good idea for him to call Trump's bluff. If he railed hard against the deal, it'd become another partisan issue, whether relations with Ukraine broke because of Trump or Zelenskyy being a hardliner. That's why they've been trying to find any excuse at all to say Zelenskyy was somehow rude to Trump while he was sitting there listening to Trump spit out Russian propaganda. Conservatives need some narrative that the US pivot to Russian foreign policy is Ukraine's fault, and Zelenskyy is denying them that.

I don't think I've really seen any literature about web3 that wasn't a crypto scam in a trench coat. Do you have any links or info about the original goals of web3?

This still feels like it's not answering the fundamental question for any blockchain project: why is this a blockchain instead of just a database with well configured permissions, and why are the advantages of the blockchain relevant to the problem it's trying to solve? Traditional databases can be configured to be append only, accept new data from users without needing a central authority to approve each new user, be queried by any random person, etc far more efficiently than a blockchain could and without requiring every solar panel owner to download multiple terabytes of historical transaction data just to run their panel.

As for the coins, they don't really add democratic control over a system so much as they empower whoever is best able to maximize coin generation. In a democratic system, 100 small solar panel owners would have more of a say in the governance of solar panels than 1 really wealthy South African billionaire, because they would represent more votes than the billionaire. In the coin economy, if the billionaire has at least twice as many solar panels as the rest of the small owners put together, the billionaire would have sole control over the governance of solar panels because they would be generating twice as many coins.

I admit I'm skeptic to see anything blockchain or coin related, but I've yet to see a problem that either technology are solving for other than "I want to be able to do financial transactions over the internet without using a bank or bank-like institution" and "I want an extremely volatile asset to speculate on"

Did people still like Dawkins before this? I'm not an atheist or super interested in his particular field of biology, but every time I heard him get mentioned after his initial New Atheism stuff it was him being islamophobic/racist against Arabs, Iraq war apologia, being an apologist for sexual harassment, etc. He seemed pretty bad for a while.

He wouldn't even need to do that. He could literally just make a third account (assuming his daughter is blocking the one where Elon pretends to be an actual child) and see all the posts he wants. This is truly Elon solving a problem only Elon has, by nuking a feature tons of folks use.

I downvoted because of the snark in first paragraph.

I mostly just want a phone that doesn't want to sell me on new ways to use my phone that I don't already do. I don't want a phone that's constantly trying to get me to use voice search, or try out some AI feature, or a search engine, etc. I have a newer Samsung tablet, and by default holding the power button turned on voice search instead of the power off menu? I fucking hate that shit, it was thankfully changeable but it was annoying that I had to change it back. I literally never use voice search. I fucking hate talking to computers, I'm not talking to a machine unless it's actually capable of feeling offended if I don't