Mac OS has always worked well enough. It's much worse now in my opinion than it was since High Sierra but it's still fine. Also, I fear it'd be quite difficult to get Linux working on an M2 MacBook Pro for dubious benefit to me.
If I was on a PC though, I'd definitely try Linux out, really don't like Windows 11 and didn't love Windows 10
I think in both cases that was already pretty well proven to be the case wasn't it?
I think that seems to be the gist of the answers here, the sugar is all bundled up with other stuff that makes it both difficult to efficiently digest from the surrounding bulk and filling because of that bulk and also a bunch of water.
Imagine how crazy it would be as tech advanced through the ages and people create their own artificial sound and eventually realise that that sounds from the mysterious artifact from the future was playing music BACKWARDS and there's discernible lyrics.
I haven't really tried but I think if you were trying to use LLM generated text deceptively the model could probably do exactly as you describe already so long as you prompt it to do so clearly enough.
I don't understand this in English. 'Whole time'?
I think a good chunk of them know exactly how to correctly use the equipment and are doing it on purpose for aesthetic.
As a teen I used to pirate it and supplement with the very occasional cd purchase. I felt justified at the time given I did still pay at least sometimes and I couldn't afford to otherwise. These days, it became so ubiquitous on YouTube that I just never felt the need to buy it or torrent it and the filesharing networks all kinda disappeared anyway.
It's not exactly ethical since I use adblockers but it's just there, always instantly available and at zero cost. I'd never use a subscription service, I have no idea how much, if any music I would consume over a fixed period so paying a fixed monthly quantity makes no sense at all.
I guess the issue with this is that it's hard to discover new music. I guess it's a little sad but really but truth be told the rate of discovery for me has been significantly curtailed since high school, I guess I was never a connoisseur or great appreciator of music so my imagination in the space was pretty limited to just whatever my friends were listening to.
I wish that would happen for me. Maybe the length of time one needs to abstain needs to be longer or something. I try to avoid drinking sweet drinks because of how easily it makes you fat but I don't enjoy them any less and my favourites never feel too sweet and often I find myself really craving a very sweet drink and it's only by not having it in the house that I manage to avoid it.
I guess I never really went full cold turkey, I figure I should be able to moderate the habit and only consume it on occasion which I think ends up being something like 1 to 2 glasses every 1.5 weeks on average.
What pisses me off the most is that Spotlight USED to work very well.
I do, but I sometimes wonder why I bother. In the Play store, the information is pretty frequently inaccurate. It used to be that absolutely everything was asking for every permission and collecting every form of data under the sun. These days I far more frequently see the claim that "this app doesn't collect any data" only to discover that the app will have a website with a detailed privacy policy (for the app, not the site) outlining all the data they're collecting that they theoretically aren't collecting. I really don't understand how that's allowable but it surprised me.
Typically these days I try my best only to use things I can find on fdroid. Sounds like that's about to no longer be an option next year though.
Dude are you serious? Attempt to debate with them? I'm not sure you really understand the scenario.
Hopefully this isn't like, at your place of work or something.
How are you going to hide the increase in power consumption? Water too to an extent.
I thought I did, because people were saying he was the "change my mind" guy and I remembered him from some internet memes a looonng time ago. Turns out that wasn't even Charlie's thing, he just kind of adopted it and was known for that. So yeh, I thought I knew who he was and turns out he was even less significant.
The specific application in this instance was that it creates "progress notes". Admittedly, as I have only the information from the article itself, having no background in this field myself, I can only make assumptions what those are like, but as the name implies it's charting a client's progress through therapy and would also imply to me a lot of summarising of information gleaned during sessions. I guess in as much as it also would necessarily have to create a transcript in doing this for you, I guess it also provides that too. This is portrayed as tedious and time consuming work by the creators of the service, who obviously have a vested interest in casting it in such light, but taken at its word, I would say in my opinion the advantage would be in automating some of the tedious and time consuming aspects of the job.
As I suspect you were driving at from the tenor of the question, there's a lot of ways this could go wrong, in particular privacy concerns when this service is offered in the manner that it is here where it's processed outside of the therapist's own clinic by 3rd parties and information is shared with additional parties and used for many purposes with only the flimsy promise of "de-anonymisation" which appears to be hollow. It could also maybe affect how the therapy is conducted, making decisions about how to summarise this information that will influence what decisions a therapist makes and perhaps that therapist might have summarised it differently if doing the notes themselves, then again this all hinges upon how effective it is considered to be. If it can be evaluated and found to be generally good, then it seems tentatively like this could be a pretty helpful tool for a therapist. But in general, my comment was really more directed at what I feel like is a sad state of affairs across the board with recent tech advances including generative AI as applied in any aspect of life or work, that I think is often lost in these conversations where the technology really shows promise or is quite impressive but because of the manner of its development or the surveillance profit model, it's basically tainted and ruined. I feel like I often come across commentary that fails to make the distinction between the negative aspects of how these techs have come about and are monetized and the tech itself where the latter is simply cast as inherently undesirable even when there's clearly reason enough for people to find it appealing in the first place for it to end up in use.
Actually I totally forgot about it. I thought I remembered trying a 3rd but since I couldn't remember what it was I had to exclude it from the list. I remember almost nothing of it. I think I recall liking it slightly more than KDEnlive because I seemed to just plain hate that but everything else has long since left me. I think that probably doesn't bode well for what I might have thought of it, or maybe it means there fewer notable problems. Nevertheless at the time I definitely decided that I ever had to go FOSS, I'd look to Olive.
Trouble is, with the FOSS offerings, I'm definitely grading on a curve. At the time absolutely nothing available FOSS stood even a chance of being useful form serious work, the lack of professional codec support already crippled most things right out the gate and the number of problems would be too big to overcome. I can't speak from experience but I suspect that's probably still the case even now. That said if you literally only have to edit some things together, you're not dealing with deadlines, you don't need a particularly collaborative workflow, you don't have to deal with broadcast or cinema standards and you don't have many terabyte of footage, probably almost any FOSS app would do the job well enough when you get used to it.
Regarding Resolve, that's actually the only bit of insight I could offer based on recent experiences compared to all the outdated info about the FOSS stuff. Of course nothing said here can be objective given personal preference but based on trying to get work done this is my impression at the present time.
I use the studio version every day for colour grading, it is fantastic for that. I couldn't get used to fusion, being only a kind of bodge-job amateur in visual FX and motion GFX, it's very hard to get used to after initially using after effects for that kind of work however I understand it's very good. The editing side however, I really want it to be good enough, and if I was doing maybe an ad, or a corporate gig or perhaps short YouTube videos or interviews, it'd probably be fine. However, try as I might and try I really really did, I could not judge it on par on a recent major documentary project where I was forced to use it, compared to Premiere or Avid. It has far more recent, really cool features that I think in time will become indispensible and I love playing with them, but the basic nuts and bolts, while very nearly being there, don't seem to work as comfortably at scale. Things like multi camera workflows in particular work in frustrating ways that hold you back and become inefficient with enough scale, the lack of auto-patching too gets on my nerves and I also find it extremely frustrating how many things cannot be done keyboard only, even with the crazy expensive full-size editor keyboard. A lot of the problems are quite minor things that would sound like nitpicking to most users but once you find yourself dealing with a big enough pool of footage and timelines the importance of the little things becomes manifest. It's definitely getting better, at a rapid pace. I'm team Resolve because I just want them to win, especially because despite proclaiming it better, I really dislike using Avid and I also really dislike Adobe as a company even if I generally like their software.
I had a go testing out what FOSS had to offer in this space a few years ago. I tried KDEnlive, Olive and Blender (well not really, I read about it).
At the time KDEnlive seemed to be everyone's favourite in this space. As an editor, I can't say I loved it, and at the time the interface was just plain awful, I looked at some screenshots just before this comment and it looks like it's come a very long way.
I really liked Olive. At the time it was for some reason restricted to something like 720p exports and weirder still it would ONLY work with h264 MP4 files. That was enough to make it functionally useless which was a shame because it was the first FOSS app I'd tried or looked at for editing that actually seemed to work like one would expect a video editor to work. Maybe I was just set in my ways but when you train on the commercial offerings which all kind of adhere to a sort of unofficial standard way of doing things that coalesced over decades, you really don't want to reinvent that wheel. From what I could see before this post it looks like it's only gone from strength to strength because it based on pictures alone it looks really cool. I guess pictures don't tell you much about what it's like to use and apparently it used to be very unstable. Hopefully it's better now.
Blender, from what I read, was a surprisingly popular choice for editing which is baffling to me because, just because you COULD edit in it, doesn't mean you should. It's not built for it at all, it's 3d modelling and animation software, I reckon you'd have an awful time trying to use it for editing and that's what people at the time said when I saw forum posts asking if you could use it for this purpose but strangely I came across a few who did nonetheless. I can only assume they had extremely basic needs.
Bonus points: (not FOSS) I also tried LightWorks, which at the time was closed source but said they were about to open source. Nobody believed them and indeed they didn't and to this day haven't. It's uhh... fine. If it was FOSS I'd be impressed but given the competition in the commercial market, it didn't seem worth bothering. Ironic since I believe they were one of the first computer based editing platforms.
Resolve isn't FOSS but it has a very good very richly featured free version that would likely beat out anything currently offered in the FOSS world, at least that was the case when I was looking in to this around 2017 or so. Worth a mention because it's really good. Personal if it's commercial software and a big project I'd probably still use premiere or avid for the editing part and resolve for the rest but the editing gets better ever day rapidly and they're by far the least scummy company for this kind of software. It's a one time purchase too. Own it forever.
It's a potentially viable if imperfect way to cover the exposed surface of the watermelon is this really a question?