ritzaco

who is going to throw $10 at

https://downdetectorsdowndetectorsdowndetectorsdowndetectors...

I've met a few people who genuinely believe that 'tax deductible' equates to 'essentially spending nothing' or somehow equate that the amount you donate would be an amount you would otherwise give to the Government in taxes so from your perspective it doesn't change anything.

This is definitely not the case. If you make $100 profit and you would have had to pay 20% corporate tax, then you pay $20 in taxes, you'd be left with $80 to buy chocolate or whatever you want.

If you donate $20 and deduct it from your profit, then your profit is now calculated at $80. So you pay $16 in taxes. So you saved $4 but spent $20, so you're $16 dollars down and now you only have $64 for chocolate, so not 'essentially nothing'.

I'm surprised - I haven't gotten anywhere near as dark as this, but I've tried some stuff out of curiosity and the safety always seemed tuned very high to me, like it would just say "Sorry I can't help with that" the moment you start asking for anything dodge.

I wonder if they A/B test the safety rails or if longer conversations that gradually turn darker is what gets past those.

https://lemmy.world isn't as big and it doesn't have active subgroups for as many things as Reddit, but for a bit of casual doom scrolling it's fully replaced Reddit for me.

It's mainly just a default Docusaurus build. I tried Astro Starlight for a recent site which is similar but a bit more modern but it had enough rough edges that I went back to Docusaurus for this one.

I use it on my paid workspace account and personal, and I got a notification on the paid workspace account that it will be unavailable.

I guess it applies to the free account too but they just don't bother to state it (yet).

yep I had an issue with an ownership change of a Google Workspace account recently and to their credit it was fairly easy (as a paying customer) to find a human to talk to who could escalate to someone who could fix the issue. It still was an annoying process that took a couple of hours instead of a couple of minutes, but they certainly didn't just ghost me or leave me out for dead.

yeah definitely my favourite feature on android too that I use multiple times per day. Unlike the people saying taking a screenshot is basically the same on iOS - no it isn't. This moves the whole display into an ephemeral screenshot and you can copy text, translate, all kinds of things, without the delay of taking a screenshot, or worrying about that file hanging around permanently after.

Super ironic that often images are the most accessible way to share text data these days but that's what enshittification brought us.

> Moreover, the report uses a far narrower definition of ‘millionaires’ that does not include all dollar millionaires like the standard definition (people with net worth of 1 million dollars or more), but rather only individuals with liquid assets worth 1 million dollars or more, who are thus richer and more mobile on average than a standardly defined millionaire.16 In the case of the UK, the ‘millionaires’ identified by the report represent just a fifth (20%) of the UK millionaire population.17

So the first report said people with liquid money chose to move it out of the UK. This report says actually anyone with a largish paid off house in a good area should be counted, and as they didn't sell their house and move, there's no problem.

I appreciate that they point out the biases of the first article, but I still find the 'liquid millionaire' a more interesting stat. The Times also reported that the UK collected less tax revenue after trying to tax the ultra rich more [0][1].

So at the moment I'd say both people are stating their side too strongly and the truth is maybe somewhere in the middle but I'm still leaning towards 'rich people are leaving the UK if they can' based on what I've read.

[0] https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/capital-gains-t... [1] https://archive.ph/qXcUc

businesses that 'need to haul ass' usually still want to try something out before buying it. That doesn't need to a a free plan, but it's common to offer some trial period to new users.

Also totally OK if planetscale doesn't do this and that $39/month _is_ the best way to try them out, I just think it would be good for them to make explicit in the article what I should do if I think I might want it but want to try it.

I guess this is the 'meat' of the article. Interesting that they regard reddit as a 'niche' quirky corner of the internet. To me they are well over the peak of their enshittification journey with mainly bots and overzealous mods and pay-to-play accounts. Just like digg and others before something else will take their place soon enough as the place where enthusiasts share valuable content before businesses poke their nose in and we repeat the cycle again.

> What's most interesting is what content companies are getting the best deals. It's not the ragebait headline writers. It's not the news organizations writing yet another take on what's going on in politics. It's not the spammy content farms full of drivel. Instead, it's Reddit and other quirky corners that best remind us of the Internet of old. For those of you old enough, think back to the Internet not of the last 15 years but of the last 35. We’ve lost some of what made that early Internet great, but there are indications that we might finally have the incentives to bring more of it back.

> It seems increasingly likely that in our future, AI-driven Internet — assuming the AI companies are willing to step up, support the ecosystem, and pay for the content that is the most valuable to them — it’s the creative, local, unique, original content that’ll be worth the most. And, if you’re like us, the thing you as an Internet consumer are craving more of is creative, local, unique, original content. And, it turns out, having talked with many of them, that’s the content that content creators are most excited to create.

This seems to be mainly aimed at existing PlanetScale customers.

> To create a Postgres database, sign up or log in to your PlanetScale account, create a new database, and select Postgres.

It does mention the sign up option but doesn't really give me much context about pricing or what it is. I know a bit, but I get confused by different database offerings, so it seems like a missed opportunity to give me two more sentences of context and some basic pricing - what's the easiest way for me to try this if I'm curious?

On the pricing page I can start selecting regions and moving slides to create a plan from $39/month and up, but I couldn't easily find an answer to if there's a free trial or cheaper way to 'give it a spin' without committing.

Maybe just me, but for anyone else who was confused

- Polars (Pola.rs) - the DataFrames library that now has a cloud version

- Polar (Polar.sh) - Payments and MoR service built on top of Stripe

I was gonna say it's definitely not there on mine but I just checked and it is.

Amazing how good my mental adblocker is for things I've been looking at every day for 2 years.

Ok this[0] sounds very, uh bold to me? Surely this is going to break a ton of workflows etc seemingly with nearly no notice? I'm assuming 'launches' equates with 'fully rolls out' or something but it's not that clear to me.

    When GPT-5 launches, several older models will be retired, including:
        - GPT-4o
        - GPT-4.1
        - GPT-4.5
        - GPT-4.1-mini
        - o4-mini
        - o4-mini-high
        - o3
        - o3-pro

     If you open a conversation that used one of these models, ChatGPT will automatically switch it to the closest GPT-5 equivalent. Chats with 4o, 4.1, 4.5, 4.1-mini, o4-mini, or o4-mini-high will open in GPT-5, chats with o3 will open in GPT-5-Thinking, and chats with o3-Pro will open in GPT-5-Pro (available only on Pro and Team).

[0] https://help.openai.com/en/articles/11909943-gpt-5-in-chatgp...

Not sure why you're downvoted - this was exactly my thought reading it. I spend a significant portion of my time reading human-generated and AI-generated long-form writing and I can very easily see the AI stuff.

But maybe it doesn't matter any more? Most people can't.

I thought this would be about which is more useful in specific scenarios.

I'm always surprised that when it comes to "how useful are LLMs" the answers are often vibe-based like "I asked it this and it got it right". Before LLMs, information retrieval and machine learning were at least somewhat rigorous scientific fields where people would have good datasets of questions and see how well a specific model performed for a specific task.

Now LLMs are definitely more general and can somewhat solve a wider variety of tasks, but I'm surprised we don't have more benchmarks for LLMs vs other methods (there are plenty of LLM vs LLM benchmarks).

Maybe it's just because I'm further removed from academia, and people are doing this and I don't see?

This seems like a really bad idea. Agents need to adapt to get good at using tools designed for humans (we have a lot), or use tools specifically designed for agents (soon we will have lots).

But to make your tool behave differently just causes confusion if a human tries something and then gets an agent to take over or vice versa.

> The fundraise also saw participation from AI chip giant Nvidia

This is really obvious 'round-tripping' no? Nvidia invests in startups that are going to spend a majority of their funds on GPUs, Nvidia's revenue goes up, Nvidia's stock goes up, Nvidia makes more 'investments' in startups who use that investment to continue the cycle?

There's a pretty difficult line between making it easy to install "random software from friendly relative" and "random software from a not-so-friendly person who wants to steal your bank info", so I think I'm OK with the balance they've found. You can help her bypass the warnings, but it needs to be pretty difficult for someone over the phone to tell her to bypass the warnings.

A lot of this is good and overlaps quite a bit with our one [0], but a lot of it seems to be too fluffy and go against its own rules.

> At the intersection of AI, code, and marketing expertise, we create solutions that were impossible yesterday and will be commonplace tomorrow.

I couldn't tell if this was an example of what they want or what they don't want.

Also the dos and dont's are vague enough that I can imagine the CEO or whoever wrote this saying "no your sentence is bad because it's getting lost in the tacitcal minutiae, but mine is good because I'm focusing on strategic, long-term implications"

- DO: Focus on strategic, long-term implications

- DON'T: Get lost in tactical minutiae

Similarly:

- DO: Acknowledge the magnitude of AI's impact

- DON'T: Overhype capabilities beyond what's currently possible

isn't it easier to just say 'always use your crystal ball to perfectly explain how AI will affect our future'.

> Utilize diagrams, screenshots, charts, and other visual aids to clarify complex concepts. For software documentation, use animated GIFs or videos when static images won't suffice.

Probably means something like "Use diagrams, screenshots, and charts appropriately. Use animated gifs where needed"

Which again is kind of just saying "make it good", but with words like "utilize" and "suffice" which are probably sprinkled in with AI.

[0] https://styleguide.ritza.co

I had exactly the same confusion, also having heard of Aleph before. Then I googled to check and saw that "Aleph Alpha had pivoted away from training their own LLMs", so I figured it _was_ the same only to figure out that it isn't.

We're running out of names.

Can someone layman explain why the water is 'consumed' if it's used for cooling?

Why can't it take the heat, be piped somewhere else to cool down again, and then be used again?

This is annoying and badly done IMO. I also don't like or need the features and wouldn't pay for them if I didn't have to.

That said, what you get from Google for a few dollars / month is so far over and above any other SaaS that I'm happy to keep paying (and paying more).

private valuations are weird. There's some abstract idea that 'valuations have fallen' for sure - people are saying things like "I don't think COMPANY_BLAH that raised $100M at a $1B valuation is actually worth $1B"

But it was never officially 'worth' that much in the same way as a market cap of a public company anyway. If they do a downround, where they raise money at a lower valuation than the previous one, that's generally bad for everyone, so there's a strong tendency to try to 'wait it out' and just pretend they're still worth $1B and hope the market recovers and no one has to write down their investments.

I don't think the author completely understands RAG, and this article is a bit disconnected and unclear to me. Google already provides a "flexible natural language query interface".

I think ironically it would be fairly trivial to build what he wants _using_ RAG.

1. Accept a natural language query, like ChatGPT et al already do

2. Ask an LLM to rephrase it in N different ways, optimized for Google searches

3. Scrape the top M pages for each of the output of 2 in parallel. You now have dozens of search results

4. Clean and vectorize all of these

5. Use either vector similarity or an LLM to return the best matching snippets for the original query from 1, constrained to stuff contained in 4.

It would take a little longer than a ChatGPT or Google response, but I can see the appeal too.

Doesn't even mention that MacOS will silently downgrade you from 60hz to 30hz, and then when you notice you'll need to unplug and replug everything, change HDMI cables, try a different adaptor, etc etc and then once you finally figure it out and fix it, it will happen again a few days later.

South Africa has had more than 10 years of rotating power cuts (loadshedding) as it cannot even produce enough energy for itself. Yes it has one nuclear power plant on its last legs, but it has failed to even plan to build any new ones.

So this whole 'we are the best in Africa and need to help out our neighbours' take is kind of ironic.

> She said that while South Africa has 93% access to electricity, there are 600 million people on the African continent that do not, and South Africa believes that "if we are to eradicate poverty, unemployment, and inequality in Africa, we need to get rid of energy poverty and guarantee energy security".

The bottleneck with A/B tests isn't tooling, it's statistical ignorance in marketing professionals.

Not claiming you did this, but in your example of "Jack tweeted" vs "Jack just tweeted", it's so often bad statistics or cherry-picking that leads to results like this. Testing null hypothesis is hard, and many people will take a reality like this chart [0] and claim that their A/B test is successful.

I definitely think there's a gap in the market since Google sunset optimize, but $2000 seems kind of steep for something that many people got for free before.

[0] https://i.ritzastatic.com/images/3dcdd822dbd241b1b3ddeeb9540...

This is so impressive. Is it an ad for fal.ai? Or who is paying for it?