Their FAQ still warns about scratches & how you have to use a micro-fiber cloth. I would think there would be some sort of metal you can both engrave very precisely but also not have to worry about it scratching like my eyeglasses.
Or else put a layer of plastic on the surface more permanent than your standard floppy lcd screen throwaway.
You could make it out of tungsten, but it'd be heavy, brittle, and an absolute bastard to machine. It'd probably increase the breakeven cost by an order of magnitude.
For protecting the surface finish of the gold, you'd probably want something like the polycarbonate cases you sometimes see used for rare or precious coins.
I would much rather we use AI to improve subtitling. Better auto speech recognition, per-word millisecond synchronization, positioning based on speaker/screen content-- all these could improve the subtitled experience and would be way less creepy than deepfake voices.
Yes! My perennial problem is that most Chinese TV content has excellent subtitles, but they're burned in to the videos. So if I want to watch a Chinese show with a friend who doesn't read Chinese, there's no option even for auto-translated subtitles. I've often thought of writing a script to generate subtitle files using text recognition, but haven't gotten around to it.
Ah, but one thing I miss about the burned-in subtitles was how, on VHS at least, one could fast forward like 2-3x and still be able to read the captions. I double-lazied my way out of more than one high school book review where a boring book was made into a boring movie.
There's also the problem of content which doesn't have subtitles to begin with---YouTube's automatic subtitle generation is great, but could be improved and expanded to languages other than English.
It is expanded, at least to Japanese. What's also fun is you can then have it auto translate the auto generated subs. The results are... not typically great, but the potential!
A long time ago, I tried the "autosub" feature with anime and it replaced understanding with unintentional (dry) humour. The output had phrases that resembled a news transcript, which is probably what they were training the system on.
Both are happening. Google meet has live auto subtitles that are pretty accurate. Sometimes I find even as an English speaker I am able to understand through the compression better with the subtitles on.
This wasn't always the case (before the Sony Walkman introduction in 1979):
"The idea that a person could listen to music on his own was strange and novel. In Capturing Sound: How Technology Has Changed Music, Mark Katz mentions that in 1923, Orlo Williams compared someone listening to recorded music alone to “sniffing cocaine, emptying a bottle of whisky, or plaiting straws in his hair” (Katz, 20). This was an obvious exaggeration, but he emphasized the strangeness that society associated with solitary listening"
Many centuries ago reading alone (i.e. silently rather than aloud) was viewed with similar suspicion. In his Confessions St. Augustine defends his friend St. Ambrose for his strange habit of reading silently.
The thing with Charles Munger is somehow worse than the time Linda Katehi let kids get pepper sprayed on the quad. At least hers was a mistake of oversight. Whoever is in charge of UCSB is so desperate for dollars they’re willing to give generations of students depression via architecture. People will probably die because of that, from suicide.
The building he wants to build in UCSB already exists in Michigan and it has the highest ratings of any student dorm there. "In fact the building has a rating of 8.8 out of 10 on veryapt.com. Reviewers praise the building's amenities, including study rooms and a fitness center."
My quality of life at college improved a lot when I switched from having a roommate to getting a single room.
The building in Michigan is in the same style but not as extreme. From what I remember, it has worse ratings than other dorms, and the complaints are about the lack of light.
It would be cool if I could take my existing browser history, aggregate by domain, sort by frequency & then create the necessary xml for the programmable search. Maybe with a pick & choose UI so I could decide which sites I wanted.
Right now, looking at your allow-list config, it feels a bit custom to you, but if I had an easy way to limit search to the sites I myself know and trust, I could see how that would be useful.
I know I could probably pick it out of my browser's history UI & poke it into Google's Programmable Search UI, but that seems like a hassle and a half.
That's a good idea! Not OP, but I'm creating a faster search engine for programming queries, depending on the tech searched it will also point to curated sites that could have the answer. Will try to implement your idea as well. Thanks!
Good idea! Would you pay for a premium version where you can customize the whitelist (and additional features) if it were available? Bing charges around $5 per 1000 searches, so I guess it would cost about the same. (Google's API is limited to 10K searches / day, even when paid)
I think just the history->xml conversion would be a bit of a hard sell, but I would be willing to pay for a sub if there were some additional features like:
* easy add to my filter list (like maybe a browser plugin so I can see that the current site isn't in my filter, but I can click a button and now it's in my filter & opposite for remove for when sites start to suck)
* stats on which sites I visit after searching
* aggregate bing+google filtered searches
* curated site lists for different topics, top 100, etc. Maybe like a temporary search using these sets such that I can try them without affecting my own filters. Maybe sharing lists w friends
* some sort of search anonymization/log deletion feature
* integration with browser search on desktop & mobile
* search flags like duckduckgo so I can easily switch filter sets by typing like /news or /nerdshit in the query
A book I generally like and agree with, David Graeber's Bullshit Jobs, I find reads better as his original essay. I suspect many books get made this way where content originally starts as a good essay or blog post, but then to fit the requirements of book media, need to be blown up, at costs in time for both the author and audience (& resources for dead trees+transport+storage, if in print).
I think this just changes your own local view of the history. So you can fix the message, but in order for anybody to see it on push, you'd need to reify the changes with git-filter-branch & rebuild.
