Exactly this. Airlines are now essentially banks with a side hustle flying planes.

I've used Firefox Beta as my primary browser on my Android phones for years and have never encountered this. Maybe there's an issue with some specific features used by sites I don't visit. Doesn't prove anything but I guess one anecdote deserves another.

> Sure, do this instead of better tech

Regardless of what you think of the new mascot, do you really think the same people responsible for drawing pretty pictures of foxes are the same ones designing "better tech" and writing code and fixing bugs? Groups of people can do more than one thing at a time.

And I'd guess this is also an attempt to raise some money and awareness to the browser. At this point it doesn't matter how great Firefox "tech" is, they have lost the popularity context against Chrome and Chromium knockoffs, and will never get it back. Google will do and spend whatever it takes to keep Chrome on top, so Mozilla is probably looking for ways to at least retain what they have and keep the lights on.

Good movies have both.

Hard disagree. There's absolutely nothing preventing a fun movie from having decent writing (i.e., "treat your audience with some basic respect") aside from cheap studios and hack producers. Michael Bay and JJ Abrams should have been warnings, not instruction manuals.

Sometimes critics focus on silly or tangential things in movies that average people don't care as much about, but critics are also much less willing to let incoherent plots and repeated non-sequiturs pass just because CGI and EXPLOSION.

Ironically, Altman agrees that AI is a bubble:

Not just once the crash comes, but this sort of thing will help cause the crash.

Cory Doctorow talked about some of it in a recent post that really helped me grok what I've been feeling about the inevitable AI bubble collapse.

AMD giving 10% of itself to OpenAI is almost entirely symbolic as OpenAI will turn around and "spend" that money on something like GPU hardware, probably AMD products. AMD is just paying itself via OpenAI and both companies will book it as revenue to try and obscure the colossal losses on AI spending.

It's all monopoly money laundering, and it's going to crash hard.

Some would argue that rewriting the entire browser - the company's crown jewel - from scratch was a suicidal move. At least in hindsight.

I used Netscape and was a total fanboy when version 6 came out. It was terrible and like many users, I stuck with version 4.x hoping they'd improve version 6, but eventually gave up and moved to IE 6, which itself was a vast improvement over IE 5.

Netscape's fate should be a warning to any dev teams arguing to throw it all out and redo everything from scratch (see also: Winamp 3). It can be done but the odds are not good.

What a horrific, and probably intentional, mischaracterization. Calling AI a "little angel" presupposes that it has the best interests of the affected humans guiding it, while the truth is that these systems are absolutely going to be designed to benefit their corporate overlords first, foremost, and always.

How long until Microsoft inks a deal with Delta so that its agents prioritize Delta when someone asks it for help booking a flight? Or directs inquiries about food nutrition and health towards companies that the packaged foods corporate lobbyists group promotes? Sends requests to watch a show to Hulu instead of Netflix?

Perhaps each request will trigger a real-time auction the same way Google does for ads, with the winner taking control over your agent. Every task you might request of an AI agent is going to be susceptible to subtle (or overt) manipulation, sponsored by undisclosed parties.

AI is not immune to enshittification. I'd argue it's going to take that path almost immediately because (1) it's a completely opaque system that nobody can peer into, (2) it's unbelievably expensive to operate and there will soon be a massive push to start recouping those costs, and (3) the tech bros are comfortably in with the Trump administration, which already tried to make it illegal to pass laws regulating AI.

This is comparing apples and applejacks. If you only care about cost per calorie, people may as just drink canola oil and take a daily vitamin pill. What we really need to do is look at the total cost of living when eating real foods vs packaged trash "food". If we were honest about adding up the related external costs of illness, healthcare, discontent, disability, etc and look at it more holistically, I believe the "cheaper" shit food starts to lose out fast. But nobody wants to do that. Hell, we can't even get people to agree that being a fatass is unhealthy.

And the idea that it costs a lot to eat healthy is a myth that needs to die. Some things are more expensive, sure, but you can make a healthy meal with cheaper options as well. The truth is that people are lazy and addicted to the results of 50 years engineering to create the mouth porn that line most store shelves.

Easy to say when you live in or near London (which as I recall, you do).

There's nothing wrong with local time, and there are good reasons humans have used it literally for as long as we've had clocks. You are trading one mental adjustment -- "what time is it where Bob lives?" -- with a different one -- "what time is it where I am when the sun is directly overhead?" Guess which one you need to worry about more often?

And if you think adjusting to time zones is annoying now when traveling, imagine needing readjust your entire mental model of the solar day - where sunrise, noon, and sunset are on the clock. But hey, I guess you didn't need to adjust your watch. Hurray?

Local time is a "human sized" solution to the problem of timekeeping while UTC is a planet-sized solution to it.

Nonsense. Every single business has a list of their operating hours posted. Some open at 6am, some at 10am. Some are open on Sunday, others closed. Some close for certain holidays, others for others (or none). Some receive deliveries earlier than customers, others don't.

Most people in the US may not be accustomed to the idea of summer hours, but it's not a complicated idea and people would catch on pretty quickly.

You can't really use a wok on any home cooking appliances, regadless of heat source. The only exception are the specialized wok-specific ones some others mentioned, and even those kind of suck because they limit how much you can move the pan around.

I had a gas stovetop for years and a wok (both round and flat-bottom) was pitiful. There's a reason that restaurants basically use a 100K BTU jet engine to cook with a wok. Can you cook food in a wok on a standard stove? Sure. Will it ever be on par with asian restaurants? No. You're better off just using a griddle or flat frying pan on home stoves.

Todd Howard loved that.

I think even the idea of dropping $250 for a video game is absolutely bonkers, and calling Skyrim "ground-breaking" is being vastly too generous. The only reason Skyrim has had the staying power it has is (1) modders and (2) Bethesda's inability to release more than 1 game every 5-6 years, leading to 10-12 years between each franchise game.

I think it's a symptom of streaming services. They want to offer a massively wide variety of shows to try and capture as much of the market as possible, which means a large number of titles. But money and human resources (writers, actors, directors, etc) are still finite, so now they spread those resources across twice or three times as many shows as they used to back in the 24/26 episode seasons. Then multiply this across a dozen different "platforms". So now we get 8 or 10 episodes per "season".

Add to that their desire to keep people hooked and subscribed. If they drip-feed seasons, people will be more likely to stick around because several shows they have started are still unfinished (some kind of combination of inertia and FOMO). So now we wait 2-4 years between seasons (which, to be honest, bothers me a *lot* more than the shorter seasons).

It really sucks in a bunch of ways. Aside from just making everyone spend 10 years to watch a 4 season show, huge breaks make for problems with the availability and visual appearance of aging actors. Writers and showrunners come and go more frequently, making seasons inconsistent and lacking a coherent plan, and the small number of episodes means every episode must be SUPER EXCITING AND IMPORTANT or people feel like it's a waste of precious screentime (which it kind of is). This means there should be fewer "filler" episodes (even though there are still a lot of them) and a lot less episodes that focus more on character development vs plot movement.

Oh, and episodic storytelling has completely died as an art, so every season has to be part of one HUGE IMPORTANT series arc which is almost always disappointing because none of these shows are planned more than one season ahead. Companies want to be able to cut any show at any time, so nobody is willing to commit to 3 or 4 seasons with a planned story. And it turns out JIT storytelling mostly sucks.

Streaming kinda ruined dramatic TV.