The other day I was helping an elderly family member purchase something from the Internet. They were talking to a chat bot. One of the automated replies was a voice recording. There was not much "AI" in it, just a bunch of spam in Whatsapp all the time telling them to purchase all sorts of products. They were added to multiple "group chats" where only admins could send messages (i.e. a spam fest). But what worried me was that because the automated messages are never marked as such, I wasn't sure if they were perfectly aware that they were talking to a bot, since it seemed they were tried to have a conversation, saying hello and explaining things. Maybe that's just they think that's how bots work, and, loosely, the bot responds appropriately, by ignoring almost everything all the time and just spamming more.
I found it repulsive on a visceral level.
Add AI to this and I'll need to start praying to God to give me the restraint of not breaking other people's smartphones.
itch.io is over 10 years old, so my guess is that the owner was living with his parents when he registered the domain, and he never bothered updating the WHOIS when he presumably moved out in the intervening decade
Personally, I don't mind that "content creator" is a thing, but what irks me is that, at least in the Youtube I see, "content creator" is the ONLY thing.
If I search for ANYTHING, I get a tutorial, or tips, or some clickbait like "I had no idea about this!" Every video is by someone whose job is Youtube. The giveaway is that all of them have custom thumbnails. Someone who just made a random video about something and posted on the free video platform wouldn't even have bothered getting a custom thumbnail for it. You can't find those videos, at all. At this point it wouldn't surprise me if a custom thumbnails was a requirement for the algorithm to consider your video even if it isn't spelled out anywhere.
This could be solved with a simple <link> standard.
If we're talking "direct" payments, as much as it pains me to say it, it would be bitcoin, wouldn't it? Just put a wallet address in a <meta> and you're done. But with its operational overhead it may be a waste for micro-transactions compared to traditional payment methods.
To be honest, the real problem isn't that there is no way to mark this up, is that even if there WAS a way to mark this up, most people wouldn't because it's not a browser API. People don't even use RSS because browsers don't tell users about RSS links. There needs to be a tangible consequence of using a tag for people to bother with it. If a $ doesn't appear on the address bar, what is the point?
Information is a virus. The cure is censorship. This may sound odd, but it's the truth.
When you read a negative word, even passingly, imagine all sorts of complex interactions that happen with the neurons inside your brain. Ban the words. Block everything. Keep your mouth shut. Create a chamber insulated from negativity.
Negativity is spam. Nobody asks for it and nobody wants it, yet people can't stop themselves from sharing it, forcing negative thoughts onto others' sight. This has to stop.
I don't go to the Internet to hear about the world's problems. The world doesn't have a right to waste my bandwidth to force me to see its propaganda. All I want is cat pictures. If it isn't a cat picture, I don't want to see it.
I don't care how many countries are at war right now. I'll learn about it at my pace, when I want to. Who gave war the right to invade the privacy of my feed? To appear there, unsolicited? To demand my attention, constantly, as if it were entitled to it?
It truly doesn't make any sense when you think about it.
I can't do anything about the world's problems. Go bother someone else.
I realized today that the average person types half my typing speed. I wonder if this factors in people's tendency to use AI? Typing takes too long so just let the AI do it?
In some ways, I'm not impressed by AI because much of what AI has achieved I feel could have been done without AI, it's just that putting all of it in a simple textbox is more "sleek" than putting all that functionality in a complex GUI.
That's so different from my experience. When I first met <dialog>, I thought I understood its purpose (as a modal) was to block user input from reaching anywhere else on the page. I have no idea why would anyone want to use it non-modally, since you can just use a div for that.
Nevertheless, I was also let down by it because it turns out if your <body> has a scrollbar, scroll wheel events bubble. There is a CSS property to stop them from bubbling but it doesn't work!
>Last year the major web browser vendors decided to change the standard (remember, HTML is now a "living standard")
SIGH...
To be honest, I think it's unlikely you will ever try to open the same dialog modally twice. If you need user input to open the dialog, and a modal dialog blocks user input, the only way for this to happen is if you have an input on the dialog that opens the dialog. If you are using asynchronous tasks to open the dialog, then you probably should keep track of what is open and what is not.
The same thing would happen if you were doing it on Qt, for example.
> To be honest, I think it's unlikely you will ever try to open the same dialog modally twice.
This is a strange reaction to the blog post, because as you read, it's a certainty that my code did try to open the same dialog modally twice. This was a bug, of course, which would have been revealed in development if not for the change in the standard.
I don't understand a lot about AI or quantum computers, but I'm 50% sure in the future we'll be sold QPU's to use AI or something like that.