A decade and a half ago it was "BlackBerry" not "Blackberry". Now get off my grassy hill.

For the sake of explaining this thread, the parent was making a WordPress reference:

https://developer.wordpress.org/reference/functions/capital_...

On the surface, it looks like they're prioritizing what the customer (or market) wants - lower usage/expense - over company profits.

What's the thing I'm missing that makes this cynical?

> but what they will not do is pay a professional editor to do their job the right way, this I can guarantee

I don't think that holds up. They can save a lot of money by using generated articles, but they lose customer (advertiser) confidence if the content isn't accurate. One editor per ten replaced writers is still a significant cost savings.

A few iterations from now we might see editors getting replaced too, but I don't think we're there yet.

The time required to write a good article—by write I mean compose sentences and type them—is a fraction of the time it takes to research it. Because the AI can't do actual reporting or journalism (interviewing people, emailing sources, tracking down documents and ingesting them, checking facts, etc.) then you either push all that work on to the editor, or you consign your publication to only writing stories that require no original reporting. If you push it all on to the editor, the economics no longer pencil out, because the editor is doing the work of 10 authors plus one editor. If you stop doing original reporting, you have a bad product.

Today, with the field of journalism in freefall, we actually have the worst of both worlds: not enough editors, not enough time to report, not enough original reporting being done, and too many AI or computationally generated articles. But, I don't see how getting rid of the humans and doubling down on the AI actually solves that problem in the medium and long terms.

> but they lose customer (advertiser) confidence if the content isn't accurate

The content isn't what it should have been, which is why the previous commenter rightly assumes that no editor looked at it.

I don't follow the logic. One such article getting published does not automatically translate to no editoral oversight on any generated content.

Even a low percent of all published articles containing such problems doesn't in any way prove there's no editor involved.

It's also completely untrustworthy. It's not complex to make a fake tweet screenshot. It doesn't even always have to pass close scrutiny.

This feature doesn't change that. Whoever wanted to doctor a screenshot will still do, and whoever wanted to post a real screenshot can still do.

Now, if someone wanted to quote-reply with the legitimacy of a link but now has to make do with a screenshot that their readers may not trust, well, sounds like they haven't earned a good reputation among their readers, and that's entirely their problem.

Do you think that IT and programmers are immune to these attacks?

Nope, but more trustworthy to that stuff than not.

This is pretty great, provides a nice set of breadcrumbs for a deep dive into any rabbit hole.

Once thing that threw me off was when I went to the original panel and clicked a second topic, it cleared out the panes that I had explored off the first topic. I had to discover they weren't really lost by re-clicking. I think it would be better if there was some visual indicator they were still there - perhaps the topic (and sub-topics) get collapsed but are still visible with the heading of the selected topic?

Many banks let you set this up directly with them - through their own site - via partner integrations with utility providers.

> 99% of noise is cars and motorbikes

If you live in the city, sure. But 99% of the noise I deal with is family members going about their lives. Would love a solution to help prevent sound transfer indoors, so that I can focus (and sleep) better.

Go countryside, they said, it'll be quiet.

Except for: tractors, harvesters, mopeds, quadbikes, chainsaws, circular saws, nailguns, lawnmowers, leafblowers, snowblowers, diesel generators, motorboats, skijets, snowmobiles.

This.

I moved to a countryside 2 years ago, escaping from city noise. Now, I’m going back (although to the outer, more quiet side of the city) because I’m going mad - lawnmowers, dogs, tractors, diesel generators, dogs, dogs, lawnmowers, dogs, …

Already exists, same as is used for any other soundproofing. Rockwool insulation, resilient channels and a second layer of drywall, mass loaded vinyl, acoustic panels and tapestries (can hide some more mass loaded vinyl in there too), acoustic adhesive, scored screws to kill floor squeaks. They're all quite expensive but hey! Very DIY accessible.

For exterior noise the biggest bang for the buck is replacing windows. I had some soundproof windows put onto my previous house and you could close the door on a parade going by and not even know it was happening.

Curtains add a flexibility to the use of space that walls do not. If I only have overnight guests very occasionally, I don't want to wall in part of my living room to accommodate them, but I'd love to be able to hang a curtain from some removable hooks that would give them some real noise privacy.

Tell your family to stop motorbiking to the bathroom in the middle of the night. Bam, problem solved.

A sampling of PRs looks pretty good code-wise, but the commit messages/descriptions don't. They just summarize the changes done (something that can be gleaned from the diff) but don't give context or rationale around why the changes were necessary.

It's most helpful when a GitHub/Linear issue is linked because the "why" is extracted, and also for larger PR's

The "why" should be in the commit message. That's what it's for

Different strokes: I prefer it in the PR, with a lot of detail, with commits that are very granular and just explain what they do. PR descriptions should have all the why, test cases, pictures, etc.

> it's not something that appears in the complaints I've come across.

It reads to me like it is.

Arguably five to six of the issues in your list are exacerbated (if not enabled) by constant surveillance. Call transcripts are one more thing that adds to that feeling of surveillance.