Not really the meat of your question, but in my opinion it already lost its punch at its creation, given its etymology. I wish we would have hit the reset button and clarify that when "Semites" and "antisemite" refer to only Jews, it's only in the historical context of Nazi Germany. Sometimes I wonder, if I should simply use antisemitism for the hatred against Palestine, too, and that without any context or explanation.
This year I've hardly watched any movies on my own so far. I think my other hobbies simply demand more time and there is nothing I urgently want to watch currently. Even the movies I only slightly desire to watch are just some of my favorite movies like Akahige that I haven't seen in a long time.
Yes, recently I complained about a local goon and accidentally accused them of being a Gen Alpha, but they were late Gen Z. To prevent incorrect generational discrimination I propose an extension of the generations in the format {generation label}-{birth datetime in ISO 8601}-{country code}:{postalcode}-{firstname}:{lastname}-{random-id}. Now I can correctly complain how the "GenZ-2007-05-01T09:00:00Z-de:33604-Lazlo-Ailton- 16b849e3-3368-4df0-b4c1-56e9cf46c5fb" are lazy slowpokes who will be the doom of the world.
Unfortunately I fail to do it regularly, but I love it. On the one hand it helps me to wrap up the day, clear my head and fall asleep. On the other hand I love to reflect on snapshots of my past thoughts and experiences.
It also depends on the type of journal. For example I maintain a dream journal, too, which improves your dream recall. Furthermore discovering patterns, confusions and in general yourself in your dreams is fascinating.
Letters don't have colors, but people may associate a specific color with a letter. It could be influenced by logos, symbols and just about anything that affected us personally in our life. It's not a logical binding.
E.g. I can imagine that a lot of people will associate the letter "x" with the color red, because they are often displayed in that color, especially when it symbolizes deletion. Perhaps someone was a big fan of the pro wrestling stable D-Generation X and therefore they see x in a green color. Another person thinks of a black X, because they are addicted to Twitter.
However I think most of us don't know why exactly we associate a color to a letter and it's the result of a looooot of links and associations.
Well, people are people. It might be unpleasant and rude to systemically browse people, especially if you need to interrupt and clarify your prompts, basically treating them like chatbots.
The way I see it, you should differiante how you approach human and inhuman sources. Information from people have a lot of advantages, too. You might get your target information quickly without any "bloat" from e.g. an encyclopedia article. However you might lose a lot of key information. A person forces you into an interactive bi-directional conversation. They will get information from you and more likely add additional information you need.
For example you might get the commonly accepted translation of an ancient poem from an article. A human can give you that, too, but if they notice that you are absolutely not familiar with the subject, they might also clarify that a literal translation is not possible, that you need the context of this historical event and so on. In a inhuman source you might have skipped that information. This is how some people may use a trusted source, but still leave with fake news, because the extracted information is incomplete.
In reality you can't reduce AI to replace only "Level 1 coding" and do only "typing". It will make assumptions about these "Level 2 and 3" decisions in its generated code. To reduce or control it you have to invest more into documentation/instructions and code review. You basically change the focus based on the assumption that "Level 1 coding" with all of that "hand-crafted" code was such a big waste of time and money. But it's a made-up problem.
On top of that a lot of vibe-coded projects that appear here and there seem to not even intend to let the AI do only the typing. They don't just let the AI translate "flow" and "architecture" into code. They make the AI translate their demands into code.
Could you elaborate how the configuration might not be respected? Do you mean that you've often encountered applications that save files to hard-coded paths and do not even let you change the destination path?
If you ask me, that's just bad software design. If the software is open-source, there is the option to request the developers to read the actual path of the respective well know directory from the XDG environment variables or allow configuration.
If we look at only the Blender Development Fund, the list of the corporate patrons include Meta, Google, Nvidia and even Adobe. In general, this is the situation for a lot of FOSS projects. If Anthropic as a Blender patron is bad news, then things were never good in the first place.
In my opinion, whether it's good or bad, it is a compromise that we rely on.
The user does decide, XDG user directories are optional and configurable. Since they are already established, user-friendly distros / desktop environments already pre-install them.
And what speaks against just using a new directory within your home directory as your "specific place that is user owned that isn't filed with cruft and configuration files"?
I believe in causal determinism and personally I still believe in free will, because in a hypothetically undetermined existence where we have this magic power to make a decision, it makes an impact whether or not I believe in it. In a determined existence whether I'm aware of it or not doesn't matter as it's already determined.
When it comes to laws, ethics and judgements, I don't think there is a clear solution, since all of this is built on the idea of free will and specifically accountability. We have this weird line, because only with time we took some levels of determinism into account for judging an action, e.g. psychological determinism.
I'm not sure where my line is. I guess in practice it makes sense that we can only consider determining causes where we can describe the events that lead to the action in detail (that too is vague and contextual). E.g. Tourette causing someone to say the n-word is more direct, clear and definitive than a traumatic event leading to abuse. Then again, it also means my lack of (specific) information in the chain of causation decides how I view someone.
When people tell you that AI will (or already does) take a lot of jobs, it's not necessarily implied that it's good enough to replace humans. Just that it is sold well enough to the people who make those decisions.
Funny that you feel this way, because I thought about posting a similar and yet almost opposite post to !mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world. I think it gets too much attention compared to other missions.
I think the Artemis mission isn't completely useless and even regardless of Lunar economy and nostalgic motivation, there are some benefits, sure. But all of this over-sensationalized exposure with more emphasis on the USA is the reality check that we're slowly resetting to a space race. I always thought that it was a beautiful story that what started as competition turned into the biggest evidence of our united efforts. And while I don't think collaborations will end, I fear that they will turn into alliances and we are back to competition.
Shit like this is a reminder to me that a large portion behind some AI products' hype are people who have no clue what these products even do. I wonder how the world would change, if these jack of all trades who invest waste so much time into collecting ideas to fill up their pockets, instead spent more time on actually understanding the ideas they have chosen and build at least a fundamental knowledge.
I'm not very good at it, but NetHack catches me every now and then.