Paid_in_cheese

An idea whose time as come ... again.

We're at a unique moment where a decent computer from 10 years ago is still pretty usable provided you don't have Windows 11 or a need to run a particularly recent version of Mac OS. There's no real reason to keep replacing laptops these day outside of physical damage.

Not to mention the advantages of having the ability to pull a battery from a computer that won't respond even to the power button (a problem I had to deal with for a Windows firmware update I told Windows not to apply ... this year or late last year). I ended up connecting USB accessories to run the battery out faster so I could get my computer back. Technically, I could have gotten the battery disconnected but the bottom panel was messed up and I couldn't sensibly get it off without voiding a warranty.

Bring back swappable batteries. And how about RAM and storage that's not soldered on while we're at it?

I didn't really get into the first one but if Tim's in it, I'll see it. (I don't promise to enjoy it more than the original, though.)

Not really keen to get into a theological argument about a sacred text I don’t believe in. However, if you gave a neutrally translated Bible to someone who had never heard of the Trinity, it’s extremely unlikely they would come to Trinitarianism on their own.

Not an athiest but not a Christian or Muslim either. I used to be a Christian. At roughly the minute mark, the presenter claims that the Bible says that god is a Trinity. The video references Matthew 28:18-20 (about baptizing in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). While it's true that Matthew says that about baptism, that verse doesn't say that God is a trinity. Trinitarianism is one doctrine some have derived from the Bible but the Bible doesn't contain the concept directly or Christians wouldn't have had so much fighting about it. That's not even getting into the nature of Jesus himself which spawned some humdinger disagreements over time. 🥴

Slightly before that, the presenter claims that the Bible is our only source of truth (paraphrasing ... not going back to get the exact wording). The video doesn't prove that and it's not true that the Bible is our only source of truth.

It also relies on a lot of ignorance of the Quran at the very least on the part of the people watching it. I'm not in a position to speak much to the Quran other than to note that a devout Muslim would likely not find those arguments compelling.

This kind of "apologetics" / evangelical effort aren't edifying or useful to the believer or the unbeliever. To borrow a concept I heard from Christians while I was one ... those who can be argued into converting can be argued out of it. This kind of presentation is the sort of thing unprincipled people use to grift money out of believers in the idea that this will convert unbelievers.

Being limited isn't that big a deal. My instance has them limited because of their lax moderation and an excess of reply guys. All it means is that I get a notification saying "Someone you might know sent you a notification" and I get to review and accept or deny the notification depending. Plus they have to request permission to follow me so I get to check them out before accepting.

I still have tons of mutuals on .social and I get new ones all the time. While each person making the choice about whether to accept notifications or follows from a particular user is going to make their own choices, I don't think it's particularly inconvenient.

At the moment, not so far as I know. The challenge for any client is that Mastodon (right now) doesn't load entire threads unless you're on the same server as OP. Instead, the API object says the post is "in reply to this post." If no one on your server is following the post directly prior to that in the thread, then the chain is broken.

There's a bot called FediFetcher that an admin can install to pull in other toots in a thread. Vanilla Mastodon is already working on an effort to integrate this functionality directly but I don't know how soon it will be live.

There's a browser plugin called Substitoot that will pull in other parts of a thread provided you click on the next post up in the thread (in my experience this may take a few clicks).

Lastly, I hear that GoToSocial already pulls in the rest of the thread.

None of that does exactly what you asked for but it's a prerequisite to implementing what you're hoping for.

If it is the DNS, I'd say OP should change DNS on their phone to point to something else. I can (and do) on iPhone. I'd be shocked if Android couldn't. Easier than leaving your VPN on all the time. Although there are benefits to leaving VPN on too. Kind of a personal choice for the most part.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardassians_(Star_Trek:_Deep_Space_Nine_episode)

I was getting the episode number for a joke I was doing in Ten Forward. 😹

Don’t be. It’s been the highlight of my day. Don’t do it again. — Sisko, DS9 S2E05 “Cardassians

There's a kind of scam that some in the AI industry have foisted on others. The scam is "this is so good, it's going to destroy us. Therefore, we need regulation to prevent Roko's Basilisk or Skynet." LLMs have not gotten better in any significant degree. We have the illusion that they have because LLM companies keep adding shims that, for example, use Python libraries to correctly solve math problems or use an actual search engine on your behalf.

LLM development of new abilities has stagnated. Instead, the innovation seems to be in making models that don't require absurd power draws to run. (Deep Seek being a very notable, very recent example.)

I watched this video all the way through hoping they would turn things around but it's just the same fluff for a new audience.

The closest thing to groups we have on mastodon really are just boost bots. It’s pretty annoying that mastodon doesn’t have more. But it’s pretty understandable that mastodon users would assume that.

I’m guessing the issue is with mastodon users at-ing multiple communities on Lemmy/etc creating unnecessary cross posts / duplicates?

If part of your coworker's job is answering questions for coworkers, it's disrespectful (not to mention a career-limiting move) to outsource that labor to an LLM. However, your coworker may be in a situation where they feel overwhelmed by coworkers not using available resources or they may have some other reason for "outsourcing" their work to an LLM. Or they could be underpaid, disgruntled by workload, or a bunch of other different things.

Without more context, it's hard to know what may be going on there. I don't think a constructive conversation with your colleague is possible without getting more information from them. I would recommend being pretty direct. Maybe something like: "It seems like you may not have read my question. This isn't a question that I can get a usable answer from an LLM for. Is there another resource you think I should have used before contacting you?"

If this still feels too confrontational, you could take out the second sentence.