I think google still listens to the quote operator first, but if that would return no results, it then returns the results without the quotes.

That seems to be what I’ve seen from my experience, anyway.

Work applications have been super bad when it comes to" people" sending me messages about my resume. Almost no real person has spoken to me.

What do you mean by this? Are applications getting rejected more than otherwise? Less than otherwise?

I also thought that…

And the reason, I think, is simple. Product names are usually nouns, not verbs. So when I see “treat”, I think of “a treat”, not the act of treating something.

It should be “UTI test + treatment”.

Yeah I was about to comment the same observation. All of a sudden I’m noticing multiple Grok tweets that say “every damn time”? Is that a racist dog whistle in itself?

Why is the tweet surrounded by what looks like a stainless steel bowl displayed under disco lighting?

Oh shit all the still-blue ones completely missed my mind.

Nevada and Hawaii the only states that didn’t change. Wonder what happens if you take away the Vegas Strip from Nevada.

but markets ‘shrug and move on’

Because taco.

Man there are way too many IoT standards. What’s the difference between these two? How do they each compare to Matter?

I misread 50€ as 50c and was utterly shocked.

Might it not also depend just on how you define “the production team”? Since editing is often termed “post-production”, it would be reasonable to exclude the editors from the “production team”. To me that term seems more to imply the lighting, cameras, audio, PAs, and other people actually on set, rather than the task writers or editors.

• There Was an Old Lady Who Swallowed a Fly
• The Farmer in the Dell
• Le Fermier dans son pré (French version of the above)
• The Wheel of Time
• New Spring

The first three all related to a recent conversation in !vampires@lemmy.zip.

Lucky buggers. Apparently it was banned here until '92.

Oh wow. I’ve actually never used Dvorak on mobile. I always like to tell people that the same thing that made QWERTY good on old mechanical typewriters, the thing that holds it back on modern keyboards, is what makes QWERTY good again in the algorithm-assisted typing of a modern touchscreen.

It takes ages to get good at

It took me about one week to reach a basic competency, two weeks before I was equal in both (though this was partly because my QWERTY speed had also fallen), one month before I reached my pre-Dvorak average speed, and I capped out at about 30% faster in Dvorak than I was in QWERTY.

(Note: my methodology in testing this was very imperfect. It relied on typing the same passage on each keyboard layout, once per day, changing the passage each week to avoid too much muscle memory. Certainly not scientific, but relatively useful as a demonstrative.)

In a broader sense, my average comfortable typing speed in QWERTY was about 60–70. When speed-typing, I could push that up to 80. And the top speed I would hit in typing games was about 100–105. In Dvorak, those numbers shifted to 80, 100, and 120.

Granted, the comment above (or it might have been one of the very few good points in the article linked from that comment, I forget) made mention of the fact that some of the benefit is not in the keyboard layout itself but in the act of re-learning as an adult. I strongly agree with this. A secondary part that is loosely related to this in practice (though not at all in theory) is that by learning Dvorak you are not just “re-learning as an adult”, but you are forced to learn proper typing technique. Hunt and peck obviously doesn’t work when looking at your fingers shows you the wrong letters because the keyboard hardware is labelled according to QWERTY. Even a sort of situation where you are mostly touch typing, but imperfectly with the need to glance down occasionally, even if just for reassurance (which is where I was at with QWERTY) does not work with Dvorak. You become—you must become—a fluent typist. This may not be theoretically an advantage inherent to Dvorak, but for so long as the rest of the world is using QWERTY, it certainly is, as a matter of fact, an advantage. And for that reason, even if no other, I do strongly recommend anyone even vaguely considering it to switch.

causes a lot of little annoyances when random programs decide to ignore your layout settings

Not a problem I’ve encountered very often.

or you sit down at someone else’s computer and start touch typing in the wrong layout from muscle memory

This does happen. But personally I have found that my QWERTY speed is still faster than most people’s, even if it’s now a lot slower than either my Dvorak speed or what my QWERTY speed used to be. It takes maybe 10 seconds to adjust mentally. And if it’s a computer you’re going to be using regularly, just add Dvorak to it—it’s a simple keyboard shortcut to switch back and forth.

or games tell you to press “E” when they mean “.”

Games are one of the most frustrating, in part because of the inconsistency. The three different ways that different games handle it. My favourite are the ones that just translate back into QWERTY for you. That listen for the physical key press, then display on screen an instruction that assumes QWERTY. My second favourite tends to be in older games only, and it’s where it listens for the character you typed; on these it’s as easy as just quickly switching back to QWERTY while playing that game. The worst, but still very manageable are where they listen for the physical key press and display the correct letter for that key according to Dvorak. But you quickly learn to associate a key with muscle memory, so it’s not really an issue in practice.

Anyway, all of this is wildly off topic. Because my original comment was memeing. Nobody was meant to take it seriously. It was, as the kids say, for the lulz.

2 definitely does happen a lot with conservatives, but I think it’s a stretch to suggest it happened here. The evidence @kirk@startrek.website provided seems a little inconclusive to me (I’d really want to see a broader history of satirical comments and/or anti-AI-hype comments prior to this tweet to be the real proof, not an after-the-fact comment which could be taken either way), but on the face of it taking the first tweet seriously is a bit ridiculous. Had they used some self-help book or a piece of genre fiction (even excellent quality genre fiction) it might have become a bit more ambiguous (even then, the idea that someone would sincerely hold out the idea of AI summaries as being equivalent to actually reading a book is a fucking stretch), but using Tolstoy? Someone famous for the quality of his prose? Give me a break. Nobody believes that.

1 is obviously just subjective and meaningless. Personally, had I seen the original tweet without context, I think I would have found it funny as a parody of the AI-hyping techbros. You’re welcome to disagree, but only insofar as you disagree that you personally found it funny. You are not welcome to make a generic sweeping statement that “it was not funny”.

He’s a VC at Sequoia Capital. Apparently not a particularly important one, since he’s not listed among the “key people” on the firm’s Wikipedia page.

Still, I’d be inclined to say “boycott companies with Sequoia investment”, apart from the fact that at least some of them have called on Sequoia to distance itself from Maguire.

Oh that’s excellent. Yes, it’s pretty much smack-bang on a “sewer gravity main trunk” from that map.

Interesting that it’d be labelled BCC on QUU infrastructure.

Explanation: Ea-nāṣir is a copper trader mentioned in the “complaint tablet to Ea-nāṣir” (UET V 81), written around 1750 BCE. It is sometimes said to be “the oldest known customer complaint”.

Oh, I have a “wtf, driver” story of my own that I was gonna post on here last week but got too lazy to.

I’m driving on a three-lane (in our direction of travel) road. The left-most lane allows parking at night, and there’s this one spot that basically always has a couple of cars parked in it, effectively narrowing it to two lanes. That spot is not long after a set of lights, just around a bend (so if you’re not familiar with the road, perhaps you don’t know to plan ahead for it and won’t see a huge way in advance). I’m in the middle lane because I know not to get into the left lane until after this spot. Two cars in the left lane. I overtake one of them in the normal flow of traffic, but can see it’s a bit sketchy with the second car as to whether I will finish overtaking it before it needs to merge in. If I knew they were a good driver it would be no issue, they’ll slow down and slot in behind me, but if they’re aggressive this could be really bad for me. So I slow down proactively and let a big gap grow between me and the car in front of me, as well as let the left lane car get clearly in front of me.

But left lane car doesn’t change lanes. And the parked cars are getting very close now. We get closer and closer, and eventually left lane car puts on their blinkers, but…clearly isn’t going to change lanes. So instead I gun it, hoping that the reason they didn’t already change is because they’re exceptionally cautious, and aren’t about to change right into me. They don’t. They slow down quite a lot.

I guess if you’re going to fail to read the road properly, it’s much better to do so in an overly-cautious way than the opposite. But jesus christ mate; you had such a long time where you could see the cars parked ahead of you (assuming you were looking ahead of you), could have accelerated ever so slightly into the gap and changed lanes to avoid them. Instead, you waited to the last second and had to almost come to a dead stop. Why‽

Again though, it was, at the very least, not unsafe driving in any way. For that I am thankful.