top right: view by category. switch that to classic and it’s back to the same one of the old days

by selling me a license that lets me run their software on my own machine, not theirs. Like in the old times

going to “C:\Users\user\Documents” in explorer, vs just typing in “documents”. One takes you to your documents folder, which will be empty, the other takes you to some other path from onedrive

~/code/$LANGUAGE/$REPONAME

the guy who invented the segway is still alive. The guy who bought his company later drove off a cliff, though it is suspected he had a heart attack while driving

on some sites the plugin fails to properly detect which fields correspond to which, true (usually when javascript fuckery is involved). But fixing that by manually pointing out the fields once on such sites is easy enough for me. I also switched firefox to use keepassxc for passkeys, which makes them actually portable and usable for me.

asking such an open ended question doesn’t mean much when nowadays, more and more people consider “anything I don’t agree with” to be hate speech.

what sucks about keepassxc?

this is so games can render at half the framerate, but the fps counter doesn’t show it right? Yay? I guess…

extensions are not supported in gnome. gnome devs do not care in the slightest if they break them whenever.

they aren’t. The only difference is that the state transition table is so unimaginably gargantuan thit we can only generate an approximation of a tiny slice of it, instead of it being literally a table

a > 30000 vehicle that won’t be available for a decade

matrix multiplications. lots and lots of matrix multiplications. What gpus are good at already

the exact same intended use case, in fact

not really. A lot of techniques have been known for decades. What we didn’t have back then was insane compute power.

and there’s the turing award for computer science.

and physicists use tools from math, so fields medals should be awarded to physicists.

yeah, so that means that it’s not incremental improvement on what we have that we need. That will get us nowhere. We need a (as yet unknown) completely different approach. Which is the opposite of incremental improvement.

because, having coded them myself, I am under no illusions as to their capabilities. They are not magic. “just” some matrix multiplications that generate a probability distribution for the next token, which is then randomly sampled.

the first advice the superintelligent ai would give: “power me down”

incremental improvements on a dead end, still gets you to the dead end.