It depends. “Donald Trump wants to annex Wisconsin as the 51st state” wouldn’t be funny. Pocketpair launching a Steam store page for the Palworld dating sim (which was last year’s April Fools joke) was.

But yeah, this isn’t the time for political humor.

Why do you go for a MIRV if your warhead doesn’t even leave the atmosphere?

Depends on your keyboard layout. On Macintosh-like keyboards it can be as simple as AltGr+dash. On smartphone keyboards you can just long-press the dash.

On Windows you’re expected to hold down Alt and enter some code.

I find that LLMs also tend to create very placative, kitschy content. Nuance is beyond them.

So far Article 7 hasn’t been used because Poland had Hungary’s back. Given that Poland is no longer ruled by the right-populist PiS, that might no longer hold, though.

Not everyone needs to talk to everyone. But many people need to talk to many people.

Microsoft had to abandon the initial Vista project and start over because they couldn’t manage a team of 1000 developers. People working on adjacent features had to go through so many layers of management that in some cases the closest shared manager was Bill Gates. For something like getting a change in the shutdown code reflected in the shutdown dialog.

Huge teams become exponentially harder to manage efficiently.

Welp, there goes the neighborhood. If they want to do an IPO they’ll probably enshittify the hell out of the platform and jettison all remotely raunchy communities. Because nothing says “good investment” than a service that just drove out a fair chunk of its user base.

That undersells them slightly.

LLMs are powerful tools for generating text that looks like something. Need something rephrased in a different style? They’re good at that. Need something summarized? They can do that, too. Need a question answered? No can do.

LLMs can’t generate answers to questions. They can only generate text that looks like answers to questions. Often enough that answer is even correct, though usually suboptimal. But they’ll also happily generate complete bullshit answers and to them there’s no difference to a real answer.

They’re text transformers marketed as general problem solvers because a) the market for text transformers isn’t that big and b) general problem solvers is what AI researchers are always trying to create. They have their use cases but certainly not ones worth the kind of spending they get.

Fx on Android user here. Works fine for me.

Because giving answers is not a LLM’s job. A LLM’s job is to generate text that looks like an answer. And we then try to coax framework that into generating correct answers as often as possible, with mixed results.

I remember talking to someone about where LLMs are and aren’t useful. I pointed out that LLMs would be absolutely worthless for me as my work mostly consists of interacting with company-internal APIs, which the LLM obviously hasn’t been trained on.

The other person insisted that that is exactly what LLMs are great at. They wouldn’t explain how exactly the LLM was supposed to know how my company’s internal software, which is a trade secret, is structured.

But hey, I figured I’d give it a go. So I fired up a local Llama 3.1 instance and asked it how to set up a local copy of ASDIS, one such internal system (name and details changed to protect the innocent). And Llama did give me instructions… on how to write the American States Data Information System, a Python frontend for a single MySQL table containing basic information about the member states of the USA.

Oddly enough, that’s not what my company’s ASDIS is. It’s almost as if the LLM had no idea what I was talking about. Words fail to express my surprise at this turn of events.

Run a fairly large LLM on your CPU so you can get the finest of questionable problem solving at a speed fast enough to be workable but slow enough to be highly annoying.

This has the added benefit of filling dozens of gigabytes of storage that you probably didn’t know what to do with anyway.

That’s why I’ll make damn sure they’ll make that second branch first.

Mind you, the most likely result is that I’ll still see branches with 50+ commits with meaningless names because nobody ever rebases anything.

I’m kinda planning on teaching my team how to use interactive rebases to clean the history before a merge request.

The first thing they’ll learn is to make a temporary second branch so they can just toss their borked one if they screw up. I’m not going to deal with their git issues for them.

If he keeps flipping like that we can hook him up to a turbine and use him as a renewable energy source.

That’s why I’m going to vote for a party I don’t believe in. Normally I would vote for one of the parties I do believe in and help them build momentum on their path toward 5% – but with the AfD on the rise and the Union blatantly putting personal opportunism over the interests of the country, I can’t afford my vote to not count.

Once more I wish we had a preferential voting system so people can vote for who they believe in and fall back to a less preferred alternative if necessary.

That’s why I decided to go for a Framework this time around. In theory, being able to repair and upgrade it means I generate less waste in the long run.

And yes, it’s very Boots Theory; the Framework was more expensive up-front than other comparable laptops but can be upgraded for cheaper than buying a new one.

Not to mention the granddaddy of link pranks, Goatse. This excerpt from Wikipedia gives a nice little window info how the web operated back then:

The goatse.cx image has been used by website authors to discourage other sites from hot-linking to them. By replacing the hot-linked image with an embarrassing image when hot-linking has been discovered, an unsubtle message is sent to the offending website’s operators, visible to all who view the web page in question. In 2007, Wired.com hot-linked to another site in an article about the “sexiest geeks of 2007”; the site subsequently swapped the hot-linked image with one from goatse.cx.

Man, I miss the early Internet.

I say it’s orthogonal. Like others have pointed out, the important question is whether the game is structured in an easily extensible way.

If the interfaces are stable (or at least versioned and changing relatively slowly), you can mod the game easily. This holds for OpenXcom just like for Skyrim.

If the game is not designed to be modded, modding will be a lot harder and mods will break frequently. Then even slight changes can end up breaking all mods. This holds for any mod-unfriendly have that gets updates.

That plus the Chinese economy isn’t as strong as a few years ago so the appetite for expensive cars is dampened. Of course that’s what our manufacturers have bet on because why make an affordable ultracompact if you can just shit yet another SUV onto the market and find a buyer?