Zancarius

This is true. The outcome is also terrifying.

The asymmetric warfare that has been enabled by inexpensive drone tech has so many vast implications that I'm not even sure we've seen every possible avenue this could explore. If either side isn't willing to completely obliterate civilian manufacturing centers, it enables long-term protracted warfare without an obvious end.

On the other hand, even obliterating civilian areas might not be an "end game" in its own right if external interests were to keep flooding the front lines with drones. FPV capabilities make conventional guidance systems a little less important, and while fiber has its weaknesses and wireless systems can be jammed, the psychological aspect of never quite knowing when a drone could be waiting in the midst of one's unit is deeply unsettling.

I think there's a great deal of underestimation of China's manufacturing. Granted, wafers are a totally different thing than any of the other industries they've dominated for cheap, but I certainly wouldn't count them out.

I've recently gotten into fountain pens. Sure, a $7 Jinhao or $15 Hongdian pen isn't going to write quite as nice as a $200+ pen, but they're about 80% of the way there, and you can buy tons of them for the cost of a single more expensive pen. Plus, some models will accept Western nibs just fine which means you're buying a cheap barrel and assembling a much higher quality product for almost pennies on the dollar.

One would do well not to underestimate their ability to fill markets. It may take years, but it will happen.

"An account of human suffering" (assuming I remember the approximate title) is one of his earlier videos that sticks out in my mind and one I'll never forget. It was a tongue-in-cheek nod to the fact board diagnostics for hardware that has obviously been abused by the end user is a tedious and often thankless process.

I learned a LOT from watching his videos, and I don't even do board repair! Psychology, business, the human condition...

That's because I think it's more accurate to call it a megalithic codebase. :)

Most of what I get seem to be advertisements or automated messages if you follow large(r) accounts.

One of the most interesting things that I've noticed is these advertisements will be triggered if you follow accounts that are positioned as influencers. I followed one out of curiosity and received a DM from that account advertising some cryptocurrency service.

It's a good way to filter out and block accounts that have almost certainly not grown organically.

You jest... (but probably not!)

I remember when I was first using my alma mater's online sign up for classes in the very early 2000s, their class sign up site had office hours.

It still does.

I'm not sure what benefit it is for people to point out such mistakes, but my biggest problem comes from glide typing. Often, my device decides it knows better what word I intended than what I actually intended. I've gotten to the point where I don't especially care about those mistakes either if it's an otherwise unimportant conversation.

I think there are just some people who care entirely too much about trivialities. It may be maturity, though. Where do you invest your energy? When you're younger, minutia can seem far more important than it does when you're older. It's still worth showing them some grace—they'll learn. Eventually. Maybe.

I think you just explained the opposite—that, yes, it does make you a better photographer. You've just described everything that it has done, which is continually improving your skill set and your thought process(es) that go into your creative work. Now that I understand the process, I love reading stories from others who have learned the same lesson: Deliberate slowness gives you time to think, time to plan, and time to breathe.

That is an experience you can't get any other way. That experience, also, pays forward in other areas of life.

I'm noticing the same thing with journaling. I still enjoy writing on my computers, of course, because I'm a much faster typist. However, I've noticed the deliberately slow pace of writing by hand has become transformative (slowly) over time. I'd imagine you're noticing the same thing. It's about self-improvement more than the hobby itself.

For me, it came at an opportune time: I started teaching an adult Bible study last year, and between journaling with fountain pens and teaching, it's forced me to get rid of some annoying habits that I might have held on to otherwise.

I recently started journaling by hand and was somewhat frustrated with the excruciatingly slow speed versus typing. Eventually, I realized that the slowness was, as you said, a feature. It forces you to think. You have no choice but to take time with your words. Sometimes brevity is a gift (one I usually don't have).

I migrated to fountain pens and haven't looked back. Partially, it's because I enjoy the experience itself as much as writing, but partially it's because they've forced me to become even more deliberate.

I'd highly recommend it!

It's not just electron apps or browsers, as I'd argue modern .NET apps are almost as bad.

I have an example.

I use Logos (a Bible study app, library ecosystem, and tools) partially for my own faith and interests, and partially because I now teach an adult Sunday school class. The desktop version has gotten considerably worse over the last 2-3 years in terms of general performance, and I won't even try to run it under Wine. The mobile versions lack many of the features available for desktop, but even there, they've been plagued by weird UI bugs for both Android and iOS that seem to have been exacerbated since Faithlife switched to a subscription model. Perhaps part of it is their push to include AI-driven features, no longer prioritizing long-standing bugs, but I think it's a growing combination of company priorities and framework choices.

Oh, for simpler days, and I'm not sure I'm saying that to be curmudgeonly!

It's also the difference between 1lb and 6lbs also, so the analogy isn't perfect. The problem is that once you approach the limits of the average human ability, multipliers can transform something possible into something impossible.

I'm pretty sure I could feel one sixth of a mosquito hit me, because I've been pelted by much smaller gnats before!

(It does depend on where, of course.)

I have to agree. Backing up my Tundra (8' bed) feels substantially safer since I can see immediately behind the vehicle than any pre-regulation vehicle I've driven. That doesn't even account for the convenience with lining up for towing, hauling, etc. (It's no replacement for GOAL—Get Out And Look—but it definitely helps!)

Sometimes it can be a genuine mistake.

I was in my garage with my keys in my back pocket, checking the tire pressure on my truck, when it started honking at me. My butt triggered the panic button.

I have acute hearing. That was painful and hardly deliberate!

It's August for us here in the SW US, but there's been construction in the area that has displaced a number of them at odd times of the year.

Fortunately, snakes will generally leave you alone unless they're provoked or cornered. Unfortunately, if you have curios animals (cats, dogs) it can be a much more significant problem!

I live in an area where we have these[1], and they're generally not something you see all that often. Their biggest danger isn't their venom (they're less venomous than the diamondback) so much as their curiosity, which can get them into locations they otherwise don't belong. They aren't overly aggressive snakes, and I've encountered them several times over the years.

Alon with bullsnakes, they're extremely useful for getting rid of said rodents—which CAN carry awful pathogens, like hanta virus!

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-tailed_rattlesnake

Human proclivities tend toward repetition as well, partially as a memory/mnemonic device, so I don't see this as disadvantageous. For example, there's a minor opinion in biblical scholarship that John 21 was a later scribal addition because of the end of John 20 seeming to mark the end of the book itself. However, John's tendencies to use specific verbiage and structure provides a much stronger argument that the book was written by the same author—including chapter 21—suggesting that the last chapter is an epilogue.

Care needs to be taken, of course, but ancient works often followed certain patterns or linguistic choices that could be used to identify authorship. As long as this is viewed as one tool of many, there's unlikely much harm unless scholars lean too heavily on the opinions of AI analysis (which is the real risk, IMO).

That's exactly it, and I really like your observation that the "limit of 4" doesn't apply in some cases. Before/after class, we have the exact experience you mentioned here where people will transiently go around talking to different groups (often 2 or 3 individuals, sometimes more where there are more listeners than speakers).

What's really interesting about your observation is how the rule-of-thumb breaks down when the conversation is limited to more confined topics or: If the individuals see each other with some regularity outside the group setting (no need to engage in extended conversation about who's doing what) or some of the conversations involve topics brought up in the course of the class.

I really hate trying to carry conversation in restaurants for that reason, and because the background noise levels can often get to a point where you can only hear the person sitting right next to you.

You're absolutely right that 1) group composition, 2) room structure, and 3) motive(s) are all important factors. As someone else observed, having a "discussion leader" is also important in that sort of setting.

I'm going to shamelessly borrow your phrasing, because what you've described is exactly what happens: It's a rotation through other participants so neither the study leader nor other individuals have to "[carry] the conversation." It's really interesting, because it fosters conversation that can lead to interesting questions, observations, or other information that might not otherwise come to light. There are some significant deficiencies, of course, but I think works fairly well depending on the group.

Where it breaks down is if one person starts to dominate the conversation for the duration of the class and carries it off-topic, or if someone becomes combative. So, the group composition and personalities can influence the relative success.

I think it depends. In the context of a discussion class, it makes sense, because you don't want to deviate too far from the purpose of the study. As someone else pointed out, it doesn't work as well for unstructured conversation.

Yup, and that's another reason it works so well.

Now, it does break down somewhat when the core discussion is over or if someone is a bit disruptive (which has happened recently).

As a sibling comment to yours wrote, it DOES help that the topic is understood among everyone present, there is a clear intent to the gathering, and everyone has approximately the same motives.

This is a really interesting observation, because I'm in an adult discussion class in Sunday school that is arranged like a circle, and I've been trying to figure out why it seems that structure works so well at limiting conversational divergence.

It seems that when everyone is forced to look at each other, it's harder to divest from the main conversation without drawing your attention away from the remainder of the group. It seems better for fostering discussion with a single speaker at a time since everyone can look at that person all at once.

It's not perfect but for larger groups the "circle strategy" definitely seems to work well.

Thanks for sharing!

This is really fascinating to me, because it explains some things.

I have a friend who crushed the tip of one of her fingers, but it wasn't amputated. She's described sensations very similar to yours, presumably from nerve damage. I never asked a bunch of questions about it, and now I wish I had after reading this post.

If it ever comes up in conversation again, may I share a link to your comment with her?

Hunt for Red October for me also!

The whole system is broken in hilarious ways.

Unrelated but similar: I live in a rural area, so we don't get street delivery of mail. Instead, we need to apply for a PO Box. Every year, to verify that only residents are using the PO Boxes, the Post Office sends out a renewal form, and you have to show up with a current bill and your driver's license. The latter makes sense—the State, presumably, goes through the validation of your address, and you sign their forms under penalty of perjury, etc., the the former is hilarious.

So, to receive the very bill used to authenticate "current residency," the bill has to go through the Post Office (remember what I said about no street delivery? anything that's mailed to our street address goes... to our PO Box!), and then we show it to them to validate that we are receiving email to that address—which cannot be independently validated outside the driver's license.

The PO Box we're renewing is therefore used to validate itself. And the fun part is that if you delay in returning the form, they'll block off your box.

Doubtful we'll ever know for sure, but sometimes it's difficult to discern with cats whether they know what to do but are just letting us do the work for them or if they genuinely don't know.

I suspect the answer is somewhere in between. Our cats have an approximate model of the house and if they see something outside the window, they'll run out the door and to that window knowing where the object of interest was in relation to the interior of the house. But, this comes from years of conditioning. They've been upstairs and have looked out the windows, but when I've spoken to them while they were immediately below the window they've sat on, they started crying apparently having no idea a) how I got up there and b) where in relation to their known "map" of the house I was. (In complete fairness this could be because they spend very little time upstairs since, unlike most cats, they absolutely love commotion and socializing with humans.)

Yeah, really... I picked up a 128GiB card from the store on something of a whim a while back, and I'm not even sure I paid more than about $18USD (with tax) for it. I bet I could have gotten it cheaper, but I was impatient.

Funny. It used to be if you received that sort of response, you might imagine the author being pressed for time and giving a sort of prewritten/canned copy response.

I guess LLMs have removed some of the tedium from the process while making it more tedious for the recipient. That's annoying.

Partially, this is because parallel works that exist often reference them pejoratively as part of a polemic. As the article mentions, she could be Lilith from the Bible (Isaiah 34:14), mentioned only once, whose identity is largely uncertain (and usually translated as "night creatures" or "night owls"... which is unfortunate). The author of Isaiah was probably aware of who or what this creature was, but as with most other references in the Bible, its use is only tangential and occurs in the chapter relating to the judgment of Edom. We see something similar in Habakkuk 3 with Deber and Resheph translated as plague and pestilence, though the Hebrew words are also the names used for Canaanite deities, suggestive again of a polemical quality that we lose in the English.

The Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible has an interesting article on Lilith, but it doesn't provide substantial evidence that this creature is the same as represented by the Babylonian carving. Lilith is attested to, most likely, in other Mesopotamian literature, but distorted by later Jewish and Christian lore.

This is one of the reasons why I find ancient Near Eastern materials so fascinating. We're always discovering something long forgotten, and then it provides evidence roping it back into other surviving literature, stories, or mythologies (the Epic of Gilgamesh being one such work).

and...reality in a big way

This is the part that frightens me somewhat, because I don't think the public is prepared for what's coming. Although, it's of secondary concern to me versus your first point:

de-democratizing tech

...which is certainly problematic.

I'm at a point right now where I haven't fully decided what to think. On any given day, my Facebook feed is filled with a growing collection of AI generated images, and more and more comments are expressing exasperation that it's "real" when the images are (to me) clearly generative "art." But, I think we're at a point where the average user is going to be duped by at least some small percentage of images that are out there. It wouldn't be too difficult to imagine a time in the next 5-10 years (maybe less) when the majority population is convinced of an imagined event that never happened.

More to your point, though, even companies that have a large volume of data to train on but simply don't have the resources are going to be "very second tier." I've noticed this with the AI subscription for Logos Bible Software. ChatGPT does a better job of answering questions, generally, than Logos which oftentimes can't even answer fairly trivial queries based on one's library. I've heard this has changed in the past couple of months for the better, but I'm not optimistic because of the capability mismatch.