After getting several family group chats finally converted over to RCS, one day my phone just started absolutely refusing to verify my connection to the RCS servers. Instead of any kind of notification, I was just silently not sending or receiving messages for nearly an entire day. I had to disable RCS on my phone, which created a several day long issue where some chats would just fall back to SMS and others absolutely refused to work, or strange interactions with Apple devices where certain messages would not be displayed. After enough trouble with it I convinced everyone to switch to a third party messaging app. I'll never turn RCS on again, I can't trust that it won't just start silently failing.
I can't recall ever needing to run a batch script to read a paragraph on a website, so doesn't seem like a very apt comparison. Are you claiming there's some group of people who have JavaScript disabled but would be happily running Activex if it were still around? Seems reasonable for some people to dislike and disable JavaScript in 2026, even though another, separate group of people had ActiveX enabled in 2009.
My town in the US has something like this. Several portable toilet trailers that are typically stationed near public gathering areas all year round, and moved to accommodate large events. They're significantly nicer than porta potties, and are about on par with any public bathroom accessed from outside. They require the ability to either scan a QR code, or send/receive SMS. They've always been clean any time I've used them, and have some mechanisms to report cleanliness issues back to toilet HQ.
Yes! It's very frustrating when I think I'm browsing several variations of a single product, only to realize that some of the results are a totally different product, the brand doesn't affect it either way. I'm fine seeing results for multiple trims if I didn't specify one.
Does anyone know if there are any reasonable alternatives here if I don't want to create an ID.me account and hand my PII over to them? Do I just need to liquidate my positions and close my account out, or can I manage it offline via correspondence somehow? Seems absurd to have so quick a turnaround on this with no alternative options.
might turn out that the next company they apply to is run by street urchins who don't take too kindly to the stereotype? or possibly humorless scolds who don't want their employees telling jokes in their free time?
I think the reason people get angry about it is that it feels like an asymmetric ask. It feels a bit like saying "everyone needs to come I to the office because I like there to be people in the office, regardless of whether that's what they want." (not saying that's what you're saying here, just trying to shine some light on how it may be perceived)
I think you may have switched the "of" and "on" when you read the original post. They're saying that the human body can negatively affect radio waves, not that radio waves have a negative effect on the human body.
I'm glad your username specifies your location. My biggest pet peeve online these days is someone telling a story about "my country" but never specifying which country that is.
Also a great way for candidates to filter out employers who play bizarre mind games and think personal trick questions are appropriate in an interview.
Was it anthropomorphizing computers when they named "memory"? Seems to me like it's more analogizing for the sake of easy understanding. Sure, it's not literally the same exact mechanism, but it's certainly modeled after the biological concept.
They used that argument for years to avoid doing WoW Classic, and then it was wildly successful when they finally did. Seems to me like the inability to consider how they could work this into their ecosystem is yet another indicator of how far they've fallen since the golden era.
Amusing to see how attitudes toward AI change over time. On page 6, part of the original text has a footnote apologizing to readers far in the future for outdated speculations, then mentions that future readers "may even be an artificial intelligence rather than a human, how wonderful!"
But just a bit before that in the foreword written in the present day, bars AI scrapers from reading or referencing the materials under any circumstances!
Anyway, this seems fantastic and I'll definitely be spending some time diving in.
I don't want to sound like a jerk, but have you considered that you might need to improve your putting/unplugging habits? I used to have connectors and cords break after around that much time. Around 2018 or so I bought a new set of chargers and decent quality cloth sheathed cables. Because all my cords were new, I was much more diligent about carefully plugging and unplugging (no mashing the port, no flexing across the short axis, no yanking by the cord) and eventually a habit formed. Not a single one of those cords, nor any of the ports on my phones, have broken since then. Even the daily use ones next to my bed!
> LLM-s are not learning on the fly, but I suspect they do log the conversations, their responses and could also deduce from further interaction if a particular response was satisfactory to the user.
Seems like this is hard to reliably do across the board. Sometimes when I stop interacting it's because it nailed the solution, and sometimes it's because it went so poorly that I opted to bin it and do it myself. Maybe all of the mid conversation planning and feedback is enough though.
There have been several projects lately attempting to create running context/memory, and Claude Code also has some concept of continuous conversational memory, but all if these are bolted at inference time, there's still no concept of conversations feeding back into base model training/weights on the fly.