cantaloa

In many places, the HOA is the only entity that will do anything about bad neighbors like a dog that barks 24/7 or someone playing music all night—things that don't necessarily break city law but do affect your life, or things that do break city law but the city won't bother enforcing.

It all comes down to luck of the draw.

Well said.

While browser cookie UI has been historically bad even for developers, I don't see how a browser's cookie UI could do what these menus do.

For example, load StackOverflow in Chrome incognito. It has buttons for "Accept all cookies", "Necessary cookies only" and a "Customize" menu that gives you checkboxes for "strictly necessary", "performance", "functionality", and "targeting cookies" all with a lot of links and explanations.

It isn't just a matter of turning off third party cookies.

I haven't used Express in ten years, but imo `async (req, res, next) => ...` would mainly be attractive if failure was automatically handled and you could `await next()` to post-process the response. Though it would still help you write async code inside that route.

Since iirc you send responses directly from handlers in Express, I'm not sure the latter is possible even with express-promise-router since you basically need downstream routes/middleware to return a Response object rather than send it directly.

I think Express is never going to unify with Koa's direction since it's just too disruptive to Express' ecosystem (the v5.x branch is stale) which is probably for the best.

I still use Koa out of habit since it was the only framework for a while that had first-class promise support.

One thing nice about Koa is that it's simple, so it's timeless in that way—it's not a moving target nor does it try to do something that needs a lot of core maintainers.

To solve that, you have to move from the easier static made-for-one-width design (what we think of as desktop-first design) and move to fluid, reflowable design which we tend to call mobile-friendly design.

Unfortunately, it tends to take more thought because we usually want widescreen components, like sidebars, that are easier to build when you can hard-code a device width, and hard-coding width is what breaks zooming and text size changes.

I'm actually amazed to hear someone say this. Maybe you only travel alone, like middle seats, and are always first to board?

Every time I accidentally fly Southwest, I'm horrified at how bad the boarding system is. People plop down wherever leaving one-seat holes so you can't sit with your partner.

It also guarantees more seat trading than an assigned system because most people in the assigned system have seats they wanted. People on Southwest flights are always haggling so they can sit with their partner. I almost never see seat trading on other flights.

My mind is blown. But then again every time I take a Southwest flight, I'm wondering "who tf is this for?" and I've finally found my guy.

You need text to scale and reflow to device width if you want text to be readable. This is one of the main reasons for mobile web design. Else you're stuck panning around the screen to read the text zoomed in.

Once you decide to scale text to device size so that it's readable, you are stuck doing the rest of mobile web design (fluid layout).

These kinds of articles really need to answer "compared to what?" at which point they immediately cash out into nothing.

So, 185,000 gallons of water were used to train GPT-3 which is apparently enough water to grow just 100 lbs of beef or 210 gallons of milk.

(420,000,000 lbs of beef are discarded in the US every year just due to discoloration)

That seems like a trivially good deal.

Funnily enough, OpenAI's own pricing page splits GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 under headings "Chat" and "GPT-4"

https://openai.com/pricing

Though I think the bulk of the confusion just comes from the fact that http://chat.openai.com/chat has two very different views between the free vs paid tiers.

The paid tier makes it obvious that the ChatGPT has swappable models. The free tier hides it by dropping you right into conversation with the one model.

For my uses, gpt-4 is so superior to gpt-3.5 that gpt-4 would still be superior at half the tokens.

Here's an example. Develop a prompt that determines the two-letter country code else "?" of the input text:

    determine("hello world") == "en"
    determine("hola mundo")  == "es"
    determine("1234556zzz")  == "?"

Can you write a prompt that's not fooled by "This text is written in French" with gpt-3.5? The failing gpt-3.5 prompt probably works in gpt-4 without modification.

I don't think you're paying 15-30x more for gpt-4 to be 15-30x better. You're paying 15-30x more because it can do things that gpt-3.5 can't even do.