A site that can be slashdotted just like the 90s too...

Actually, I've thought for a long time this should have been done.

Android now has a desktop mode (you almost never see it).

ChromeOS design point was just enough OS to run Chrome and Chrome is everything. To try to improve the viability of the platform, they added some semblance of Android support.

Might as well be full android.

I will give a pass to browser frameworks. The state of Javascript has improved, but largely stayed deliberately a bit dysfunctional.

The pace of improvement stepped up, but Javascript in the browser continues to be pretty bare bones with a lot of reluctance toward embracing higher order function directly. Besides, Javascript has a monopoly on network access and DOM manipulation in the browser ecosystem, so other languages that may cater to different paradigms cannot exist directly in that ecosystem (yes, compiling to WebAssembly from other languages is possible, but that code can't touch the DOM or network and needs javascript to feed it)

Another part of google in fact declared that the browser direct javascript should be considered only as the output of a framework, and btw there should be one framework to rule them all, "JSSugar".

Other languages generally have a sufficient core library functionality to sidestep the "framework" discussion in the traditional sense, but JS is a bit of a different beast.

Dealing with an LLM for coding is a lot like dealing with a barely functional entry level programmer that will not learn.

As someone forced to deal with outsourcing to the lowest bidder, the 'make use of LLM' had a very familiar feeling to dealing with unqualified people crammed through the outsourcing firm to grift my employers, except:

-With the human, at some point you stop and say "ok, I have no idea how you are screwing up, and you can't seem to fix it, I have to look at the code and specifically figure out what's going wrong".

Judging from his description, as bad as that code is and sometimes I have to throw it out entirely, the LLM output is even worse.

The power is already there and being produced, but it's just being used for other things than pumping into a Meta datacenter

No, the bees are more important than AI bubble driven power hogs that will take gigawatts of power capacity *away* from the grid, causing grid operators to build up hydrocarbon capacity to offset the green nuclear power that was lost to that boondoggle. While Meta points to accounting tricks that shows their individual usage falls within the 'green' capacity, all the other homes and businesses get moved from 'green' to hydrocarbon since the 'green' gets sucked up by the companies trying to greenwash themselves.

Note that it wasn't the nuke plant that was thwarted, the nuke plant already exists and is doing fine.

What was thwarted (maybe?) was the plans for Meta to greenwash their inefficient ambitions by making it seem like they are just taking power from the nuclear plant, likely causing the utility to spin up more hydrocarbon energy production to offset the loss of that energy output from the nuke plant to the grid.

We can appreciate funding to build out non-hydrocarbon energy production, but we shouldn't let ourselves be impressed by these sorts of 'accounting' tricks where the net result does not include net-new 'green' energy production.

One could spin it is a bit of good news as to the prospects of taking action. There's a whole bunch of folks saying "well it's too late, let's just role with it, the damage is done and whatever will be will be". If they find credibly more effective recovery mechanisms that ultimately add up to a levelling off of subjective conditions, or even maybe a slight improvement over decades, then there's good justification for it being a worthwhile pursuit to minimize hydrocarbon usage.

It's less about how much CO2 is currently in the atmosphere and more about determining factors and accuracy for more precise predictions moving forward.

Hypothetically, it might be a bit of 'good news' *if* you do reduce CO2 that this specific factor might accelerate recovery a little more than previously understood.

It might help shape predictions of degree and timeline of bad stuff, which can be useful because a lot of folks are super dismissive if the scientific consensus is generally right, but misses the specific temperature or year.

Look, all we are asking for is a few controls that represent the subset of controls we've had. You need touchscreen for "how much to alter speed limit by in adaptive cruise control when speed limit changes?", "how should software updates be handled", "adjust the RGB ambient lighting" or a myriad of other non-urgent nuanced things you've added to the experience, fine. Just let us have a few hard controls that at least someone in the industry has moved to eliminate:
-Turn signal stalks
-"Gear" selector (PRNDL)
-Volume knob with easy mute, and next/previous track/station/whatever.
-At least some of the climate controls (max defrost toggle/max AC/knob or rocker switch for 'a bit colder/a bit hotter', ability to steer the vents manually)

We are talking about a relatively tiny amount of hard controls, stop obsessing over minimalism.

From snippets:

Those brackets might be doing a *lot* of heavy lifting. The respondent complained about some thing bogging them down and the report 'helped' them to clarify it's lack of latest AI tools. I'd bet they complained about the actual problem rather than a lack of the specific imagined fix for the problem.

This is a common complaint that is as old as time, with or without AI. Tasks that frequently are not needed but are inflicted anyway.

I'm suspecting the general response is similar to always, bad leadership is very common and inflicting demoralizing tedious bureaucratic crap on people, but this time the party running the survey is framing it as specifically about AI. LLM might be able to provide a bandaid, taking efficient interactions and 'formalizing' them into stupid 'business appropriate' fodder and then breaking that fodder back into some semblance of efficient interaction. However from my experience, people really would most prefer getting rid of the bureaucratic stuff in general.

Problem of course being is that the car headlights direction of illumination is pointed straight at various eyes at ground level (oncoming traffic, into the mirrors of cars in front of them, at pedestrians and wildlife) and the street lamps are nicely pointed down so that unless you are looking straight up, you are unlikely to be bothered by them.

It's crazy to remove overhead lights when they are cheaper to power and more durable than ever compared to the past.

There's been people talking about giving headlights more fine grained resolution and automatically darkening areas that are detected as likely in the eyes of someone, which if you pull it off, great, but until that happens and is ubiquitous.

Don't know if it's lack of business sense or wishful thinking, that these moves in a rational world should face backlash from customers as they are against the best interests of the user base. That a user base would protect their self interests and reward alternatives that treat them better. Perhaps remembering that is pretty much how the tech industry generally played out back in the 80s-90s. The user base was comprised of significantly more particularly invested individuals. Now with that slice of the userbase relegated to niche status, companies are more likely to undermine their users a bit and the users won't be trying to more actively be aware of alternatives, or depending on the situation won't even notice it.

Business successes that stem from providing a sincerely valued offering can be respected, but too often good business is about trying to lock in customers to limit their options and exploit them.

Yeah, the second point is the problem.

Yes, by itself it's greater than before and maybe a decent compromise for a device cheaper than alternatives with better options.

However, upon looking a Rpi5 costs about the same as an alternative with PCIe3x4 with m.2 down, and with a significantly beefier processor.

I'd say generally RPi sticking with Broadcom ARM is hurting the value proposition, since Broadcom isn't exactly pushing the envelope with their embedded ARM designs compared to other ARM vendors, and yet as far as I know is charging about the same.

As stated, my household is one EV and one PHEV. In our specific case, I agree it's the best of both worlds for now, because the PHEV lives within it's all-electric range except for road trips. All-electric is a much nicer drive experience.

If the other car had to do a longer commute that resulted in gas refueling due to day to day, then we'd probably do two EVs and suck up the recharge time on longer trips.

All this is also contingent on the fact we have EVSE at home. I also recognize that, currently, the story is usually quite awkward for people without the ability to park next to an EVSE and denied the ability to add an EVSE.

Yes, mildly inconvenient for long road trips.

But you have to consider the tradeoff. The pure EV is going to be more convenient for weeks where you drive more than 30 miles a day but less than 200 miles a day compared to a PHEV. The PHEV is going to need gas to cover some of those miles and/or have to be constantly plugging into a L2 charger at every opportunity to stay in electric mode. The EV can generally skip days and plug in as opportunity arise.

So on a roadtrip, the EV is going to demand you take a 30 minute break every few hours during which your car will charge, while the PHEV can replenish range with gas in 3-5 minutes.

So if you have to pick just one, do you want a regular inconvenience of PHEV limited range, or a road trip inconvenience when it comes up? At least for me, such road trips come up maybe 3 or 4 times a year, and incurring about 6 hours of EV charging inconvenience a year is better than a weekly refueling effort. Besides, stopping to rest after 3 or 4 hours of driving is something I want to do anyway, and I can do other stuff while the car charges, at least in theory.

Currently, my household has one of each, and I admit we use the PHEV for those long road trips. The PHEV is otherwise "workable" as it only needs to go like 20 miles in a typical day. The pure EV is used for a 250 mile trip that is a bit regular because that needs no public charging, and used for commute which exceeds the electric range of a PHEV.