I have definitely noticed the same occurring in North American cinema, but I do not think this is a new phenomenon. Rather, it's just a symptom of the increased commercialization of indie cinema - commercialization requiring film for all to understand.
If one is to broaden their horizons, overseas cinema is still devoid of this literalism. European cinema, Korean cinema, and the famously show not tell Japanese cinema still produce ambiguous stories that compete for awards - just look at recent pictures in Anatomy of a Fall, Zone of Interest, Drive my Car, Decision to Leave.
are movies like Evil Does Not Exist as popular in Japan as the examples in the article though? there must be a lot of similar niche movies made in the US
Evil Does Not exist is Ryusuke Hamaguchi's first movie after the internationally successful Drive My Car, so I would hope there would be some domestic support but that might be pure naivety on my part.
If it's about what people want to see, could it be that people cannot deal with insecurity anymore? We cannot deal with not knowing. We have to know for sure, so we can feel secure.
I can't speak for others, but I have a pretty limited tolerance for very explicit, heavy depictions of violence, for bad things happening to animals, or for downer endings.
I fully recognize that these don't make for bad cinema. I also recognize that they're often more effective as surprises. But they are going to dramatically cut into how much I enjoy a movie. And movies aren't like books, where if the tone isn't quite what you're in the mood for you just stop reading, they're more immediately confrontational, and backing out is a bigger deal (and almost a faux pas, walking out of a movie is seen as commentary on its quality). Previews are also going to avoid spoiling twists or dramatic moments, which, again, makes sense, but makes them poor tools for assessing tone. This means I'm often tempted to read the plot summary before watching, which feels silly, but if I want to challenge myself and watch things not quite to my taste and things that aren't just kid's movies without just sometimes paying for the pleasure of having a bad time, I'm not sure how else to approach it.
It also feels like other people have almost the opposite perspective, where of a movie doesn't have something really emotionally heavy or challenging to watch they can't take it seriously. I'm not sure what makes sense here, and maybe my tastes are just the problem, but it feels bad to spend fifteen dollars and two hours of my time to be in a space that's too loud, has only very expensive food, and leave depressed by what feels to be to be an overly cynical or myopic message or an artistic vision obsessively depicting the many ways human beings can be physically harmed, in as much detail as possible. Again, I don't think it's bad or wrong, I certainly don't want it to be banned or require disclosure, I just struggle to decide where I fit in the market, and I worry that my purchasing patterns support a narrative that leads to less of what I want.
Can't say I see an issue here. As long as drivers are driving at a responsible speed (which any amount of traffic will guarantee ;) ), it does the job it needs to and adheres to the large amount of bureaucratic friction forced upon the engineering team. Hope the engineers receive better treatment in their future endeavors.
Agree with you on that. There is nothing about LLMs that makes them uniquely suited for bug finding. However, they could excel re:bugs by recovering traces as you say, and taking it one step further, even recommending fixes.
One possibility is crafting (somewhat-)minimal reproductions. There's some work in the FP community to do this via traditional techniques, but they seem quite limited.
I would say the best roaster is the roaster where you can get the beans shortly after they are roasted. That is the largest indicator of how much flavor you get out of roasting. I'm not a hardcore coffee snob, but I read the rule of thumb is that 1-3 days after roasting is optimal to begin consumption, with quality eventually decreasing after a week or two. So you want to source a roaster that is able to supply beans that were either roasted that day or shortly thereafter, of which there is rarely a guarantee unless you are going in and buying dated bags in person. Your second best bet is to just find a roaster that supplies all of the restaurants in your area, you can usually trust that their bean inventory is being churned constantly by the restaurant business and that the beans are going to be pretty freshly roasted when you get them.
coffee beans are dessicated and so it's not exactly clear what is meant by "freezing" them, but yes, you can keep them in your freezer. Lower temperatures will slow down biochemical reactions, of course, but oxidation is your main enemy, so you need to make sure your frozen coffee is sealed airtight. the gold standard is to pre-measure the doses and that way you don't need to put coffee back into the freezer haver you have exposed it to more fresh oxygen by opening the container.
There's no particular reason a vulnerability database needs to be government-sponsored, and some compelling reasons why it shouldn't be "owned" by one government or another (one being guaranteed continuity even during seasons of change).
There is value, yes. However, things are rarely so black and white as the commenter above you sees it wherein one could simply disconnect entirely. The reality of it is within our current zeitgeist the digital world is unavoidable - be it in the workplace, the condensation of our activities (incl. unavoidable ones- banking, etc) into apps on our phones.
Of course this is barring the idea of withdrawing all ones savings and moving onto a farm and living off the land :D.
Seems like this is more for the hobbyists - building webpages for the love of the act. Frameworks are built to be standardized, enforce best practices via their design, and allow developers to 'hit the ground running', so to speak.
No web site is intrinsically valuable - the information and functionality it wraps is what holds its value. Developing the access to that information and function, enforcing correctness, and the timeliness of that development is what frameworks empower orgs to deliver at much lower cost in the present and future, vs. vanilla web dev.
You can't overstate how often decisions are large orgs are driven by hype, follow-the-herd, or "use popular framework X because I won't get in trouble if I do" mentalities. The added complexity of tools can easily swamp productivity gains, especially with no one tracking these effects. And despite being terrible decisions for the business, they can align with the incentives of individual decision makers and teams. So "people wouldn't do it if it wasn't a net positive" is not an argument that always holds.
I see absolute messes created out of React and associated frameworks. Quite possibly because, “you’re holing it wrong”. Just using a framework is not going to force best practices and it’s very easy to create terribly bloated and slow systems with these tools if you’re not thoughtful.
If one is to broaden their horizons, overseas cinema is still devoid of this literalism. European cinema, Korean cinema, and the famously show not tell Japanese cinema still produce ambiguous stories that compete for awards - just look at recent pictures in Anatomy of a Fall, Zone of Interest, Drive my Car, Decision to Leave.