I'm working on a side project to clean up and fix EPUB files with transcription errors, incomplete or inaccurate metadata, and other issues. Users can accept/reject/edit the fixes as they go through it. I have the command-line interface and TUI working (thanks to Ratatui), but I'm still working on a Calibre plugin and web-based version using WASM.
They've also been pushing digital-only PS5s and PS5 Pro so there are fewer reasons to get a disk if you have no disk drive. They have created the problem that they are "solving."
The PS5 is great. We have a PS5 and PS5 Pro, both with disk drives (internal or external). But I really hate this policy. My brother comes over regularly to watch my pets, and he can simply bring a couple of his PS5 games over and play them rather than rebuying them and digitally downloading them. This breaks the in-person social aspect of gaming and game sharing that we've become accustomed to for decades.
This seems adjacent to Chesterton's Fence, though maybe not the canonical form of it.
For anyone not familiar with the term, Chesterton's Fence is the idea that you should understand why a rule exists before trying to remove it or work around it: https://fs.blog/chestertons-fence/
Here the issue is not that the rule was removed, but that the code followed the wording while missing the reason the rule existed.
I agree. Their fountain pens and inks are just rock solid, and I've practically never run into an issue with any of mine. I wish more companies would obsess over the details like Pilot does.
I agree. If the real concern is the flood of low-effort slop, unmaintainable patches, accidental code reuse, or licensing violations, then the process should target those directly. The useful work is improving review and triage so those problems get filtered out early. The genie is already out of the bottle with AI tooling, so broad “no AI” rules feel like a reaction to the tool and do not seem especially useful or enforceable.
I had this same issue early on when trying to adopt Obsidian. I was overwhelmed by all the "systems" and I was worried I was creating a headache for myself later on. Now I just focus on dumping text in, using search, and linking only as needed. Basically don't overdo it.
That makes sense for code or technical text, but it is less relevant for car UIs. In an infotainment system you almost never see ambiguous strings where O vs 0 or I vs l matters. Everything is highly contextual, short, and glance-based. These fonts are tuned for distance, motion, glare, and quick recognition, not for reading arbitrary identifiers. If it tested poorly in real driving conditions that would be a real problem, but judging it by programmer font rules feels like the wrong yardstick.
I've had good results from the James Hoffman recipe [0], although I brew inverted. You can push the plunger down with just the weight of resting your arm on the plunger. For something very different, you can brew something not-quite-espresso using the Fellow Prismo cap for the Aeropress.
We have been fine-tuning models using Axolotl and Unsloth, with a slight preference for Axolotl. Check out the docs [0] and fine-tune or quantize your first model. There is a lot to be learned in this space, but it's exciting.
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/ksarkhel; my proof: https://keybase.io/ksarkhel/sigs/2C5BZyjsFh9eLr4vNe6-e6IVbpXEE0Edm4UuJ1rBcAA ]
Github: techwizrd
Fediverse/ActivityPub: Mastodon: @[email protected] Lemmy: @[email protected] X: @kunikins