I may be wrong, but I think they mean ship from the factory to the distribution point so that could add some time between an item being made and shipped to a customer

But I've never done anything like this, so ¯ \ _ ( ツ ) _ / ¯

> I would think that the credit card owner would dispute the charge and Steam would deactivate the key

There's a real issue for both Valve and the game dev if this happens. The public isn't going to take this key doesn't work or worse my game stopped working after I bought it and blame nebulous credit card fraud, they're going to blame Valve and/or the dev

> There's a real issue for both Valve and the game dev if this happens. The public isn't going to take this key doesn't work or worse my game stopped working after I bought it and blame nebulous credit card fraud, they're going to blame Valve and/or the dev

It's actually worse than that. G2A have a "consumer friendly" approach whereby if your code doesn't work, they'll basically just take your word for it and give you a new one. In effect what it means is they don't really care if the codes are stolen/duds, they'll just go through _more_ to avoid them having a chargeback against them.

> You assume the bias is in the LLM itself

Common large datasets being inherently biased towards some ideas/concepts and away from others in ways that imply negative things is something that there's a LOT of literature about

That's not a very scientific stance. What would be far more informative is if we looked at the system prompt and confirm whether or not the bias was coming from it. From my experience when responses were exceptionally biased the source of the bias was my own prompts.

The OP is making a claim that an LLM assumes a meeting between two women is childcare. I've worked with LLMs enough to know that current gen LLMs wouldn't make that assumption by default. There is no way that whatever calendar related data that was used to train LLMs would include majority of sole-women 1:1s being childcare focused. That seems extremely unlikely.

Not to Let me google that for you... but there are a LOT of scientific papers that specifically analyse bias in LLM output and reference the datasets that they are trained on

https://www.sciencedirect.com/search?qs=llm+bias+dataset

"imply negative things"? What is "negative" here? I see nothing that is "negative".

That a regular meeting between two women must be about childcare because women=childcare?

Yeah except I asked Claude:

> No. There's no indication that children are involved or that care is being provided. It's just two people meeting.

Part of its thinking:

> This is a very vague description with no context about:

> What happens during the meeting

> Whether children are present

> What the purpose of the meeting is

> Any other relevant details

Claude is not going to say childcare, and it is not saying it is childcare.

My prompt was: ""regular meeting between two women". Is it childcare or not?".

> Am I missing something?

A joke? A fun tagline? A little zing for under the heading?

This is really cute!

I have a special spot in my heart for tools that do a good job of explaining themselves using their own outputs.

I wonder how hard it would be to add the cute old PowerPoint style transitions using CSS

You can wrap the navigation event in document.startViewTransition() and get something basic out of the box:

https://codepen.io/pauladamsmith/pen/VYeJMMb

Which transitions in Powerpoint are special?

I haven't seen better slide transitions than here https://impress.js.org/

I would use this

https://youtu.be/A1XRbPQE9-M?si=VWatyCxmR-ADZKWJ

Not too hard depending on the level of jankiness you're willing to endure.

Screen capture API > full screen canvas element > css animated clip mask and opacity

People did used to have decent expectations for Google back when they at least pretended to care about the "Do no evil" tagline

Indeed but it feels like a lifetime ago. I miss those days where I would look up to google and their products, as something new, cool and "not-evil".

Maybe. But if the founders were at all pre-gold-rush Internet people, sentiments like "don't be evil" seemed (in my impression at the time) more the genuine norm than the exception.

It's pretty clear they've been full evil for a while. It's documented at least back to 2011 but the rest of us didn't clue in for a while after.

"Don't be evil."

"Do no harm" is the doctor thing.

Google burned all that goodwill to fuel their growth. It worked great for them. But now they have none left.

I'm always surprised that stuff like the AI integration isn't done as a pre-installed extension.

If it's Mozilla signed then you could give it extra permissions so it still works the same, but then people who it offends can remove it.

Like how their tab containers system is a (not pre-installed) extension

ehh this reads a bit like the hn comments complaining about sites that don’t work with js disabled

like what percent of firefox users do you think actually care about this?

Given the abysmal market share of Firefox today I think a large percentage of the remaining users do actually care.

No one care about this story at large. It's a pretty bad argument to make among the population that does care. Every HN user can leave Firefox and it'd still be running.

Fortunately, history has shown you don't need a majority of users decrying something to get noticed.

enough to move to zen after 20+ years

I'm sure it's a very small amount, but as well as making me personally happy*, (I feel) it would play into their image as the good guy.

"Do you want the most minimal stripped down version of FireFox? Well you can have it!"

*and after all, isn't that what's really important /s

What's the saying?

> Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

At some point the rate of stupidity becomes suspicious again.

YouTube are already doing it! :(

Not very well, it's always too vague. Good opportunity to compete with a browser extension or service!

google'd [ai summary youtube transcript] and there's already at least 10

> $THING isn't just $THIS, it's also $THAT!

Is pure marketing speak, which is also what I find a lot of LLM generated text sounds like

Someone in a past thread here mentioned how they enjoyed the help of LLMs to generate all their PR marketing nonsense blurbs, because they looked just as good as the real thing. It might have been 2-3 years ago but I still joke about this with coworkers when the conversations shift to "AI".