The Find N6 still has a noticeable crease, it's just much smaller than the average foldable (here's a video of it with the screen off: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Ss31thoK7xM).
If someone truly can't tolerate their phone screen being in any way perceptibly different from a single flat pane of glass, then they shouldn't buy foldables. It's something you have to get used to or ignore, with any brand. Especially over time as you bend and unbend the phone repeatedly and the crease deepens.
- anything privacy sensitive
- anything processing intense (using optimized binaries)
- widgets
- camera and audio based features *can* work, but are more finicky (or outright broken on ios)
- local storage (exists in web app, short lifetimes on web site)
- performance/latency sensitive work
- (I'm less familiar, but probably local sensors, like gps and acceleration)
It's a shrinking area: You can get GPS, accelerometer, etc inputs from a web app nowadays. From my own experience the main areas that are tricky are related to automatically finding and connecting to devices: you can do bluetooth at least, but there's things an app can do with wifi and local connection protocols you can't easily do with a web app.
I sign in to video calls using my browser every day. Saying video/audio requires an app beggars belief.
Privacy is the opposite of what you get with an app. Privacy? Really?
Local storage is available to browsers. Office 365 literally functions in a browser with full access to local storage.
Anything processor intensive can be compiled to WASM. This isn't 2005 anymore.
So... widgets?
I can see an argument for games, where you want to pre-install a large amount of resources, and maybe have a better i/o story. Even that is a function of convenience over necessity.
I'd actually prefer that stuff stay in a browser and far away from my local storage on a device I take everywhere. Seems far riskier having it locally.
> anything processing intense
I can play Half-Life 2 in a browser window these days. I can do photo editing and CAD in the browser. I can have entire IDEs in the browser, compilers, non-linear video editors, and more. We're also kind of scoping this to phone apps, they're usually not very processing intense as you quickly hit heat and battery limits.
> camera and audio based features can work, but are more finicky (or outright broken on ios)
Sounds more like an overly restricted OS than anything else.
> local storage (exists in web app, short lifetimes on web site)
Once again, sounds like an overly restricted OS than a browser issue.
> (I'm less familiar, but probably local sensors, like gps and acceleration)
Nope... What you're talking about is not privacy sensitivity, but trust.
For you, you don't trust the provider of the software, so you mean being able to put a barrier around your life, and the delivered software... you think that by running in a browser, you're preventing that code from being connected to anything else... However, anything that happens in that code is directly connected to the provider, whom you don't trust.
I'm referring to the opposite... having something connected to your life, but having a barrier disconnecting it from the outside world... It involves trusting the provider of the software (maybe it's open source), but even if you don't, you can install an app, cut the network, use it locally, then delete it before restoring the network, and you have a guarantee that what you did with it was private... It's possible to build that into a web app, but most websites don't work offline, where most apps (though not all), do work offline... even if it requires an initial network session to establish authorization
It goes a step further... previously, card agreements (between merchants and the networks), required the prices to be the same between cash and credit (with the well known gas carve-out), but Durbin made that tying illegal, so now retailers are free to charge different prices for cash, credit, and debit.
The article has one thing mistaken, because it says that Durbin lowered costs for transactions, but credit owners got to keep their perks... That's not technically true (I worked at a supermarket when debit rails first went into effect, and I worked in payments when Durbin went into effect).
There are no benefits to credit users who use the debit rails, and the merchants would really rather you use the debit rails, because it is much cheaper for them. Durbin was mostly a win for the merchants, not a win for the customers.
However, if you take that to believe that the merchants lowered prices overall because they were paying less for transactions, than you might try to read into it that credit users kept their perks, while cash and debit users paid.
The true story, however, is that it's an equilibrium... When the costs go down, the saved money goes somewhere in between the two (supply and demand), and as long as there is competition, the savings are shared.
However, the real problem is that credit companies are allowed to invest interchange fees in perks at all. Credit card companies decided to take their low-risk pool, and offer them incentives, splitting the money they saved between themselves and their users, and using it as a way to pull more low-risk users. The more that happens, the more expensive it becomes for credit companies that serve mid-to-high-risk users... and since we can't stop offering credit to those users as well, those companies push for and get increases to interchange fees to cover the additional cost... which creates more room for benefits for the low-risk users, and the cycle begins anew. It's a vicious cycle that can't be fixed by changing amounts on the existing fee schedule... The only possible fixes would be in either disallowing these kinds of perks, or splitting the rail charges, and specifically charging less interchange for low-risk users (which dries out the benefit pool)
I have seen a few occasional sites that are even worse than this one.. Not only don't you get a reject all, you get two classes of settings, the default "types", and "trusted partners", and for trusted partners, about a third of them have what's called "legitimate interest" turned on, which means "we legitimately think we can share your data with this people after leading you to believe we haven't, and that's ok", and there are a hundred or more partners you have to scroll through and disable this for
I used to keep a version of whisperx around, because I think it's important to have not just transcription, but also timing and speaker identification (e.g. for subtitles)... It depends on pyannote, though, which has some wierd licensing (and is tougher to script the installs because of it), so I wanted to look at something that both had better transcription, and supported diarization (the speaker and timing). I decided on parakeet for the transcription with softformer (the diarization), but most of the available engines for it don't include softformer.
I coded up an OpenAI compatible server for parakeet-rs ( https://github.com/altunenes/parakeet-rs ) (which does support softformer) and I've been using it with OpenWhispr (a desktop app for transcription that handles all sorts of neat thing).
I'm doing CPU-only transcription (because I use my GPUs for other stuff and haven't gotten around to adding in the GPU-path), but it's incredibly empowering to be able to have local transcriptions at will.
The issue isn't food addiction, it's a broken hunger response (broken by Howard Moskowitz intentionally in the name of profits)...
You have to change your food regimen completely (higher fiber, more protein, less sugar, less carbs, less fat), and that's tough to do when you're surrounded by options that aren't...
I think the real problem is that the symptom we're trying to treat is "overweight", and it's actually a two-stage problem... Fix the hunger response... and only then work on fixing the weight... Fixinig the latter without fixing the former means you'll always gain the weight back, fixing the former doesn't guarantee you lose weight (and is only temporary, if you're using drugs for it)... You have to go after both problems.
For me, the simple shift of moving to eating 0.7g of protein per pound of body weight every day did it... It was not enough on it's own (I also eat more fiber, less fat, less carbs, though less does not mean none), but that alone was a night and day difference, and enough to change the story.
Buy unprocessed food and prepare it yourself. Don't add sugar. Eating processed food and even most restaurant food is eating food that's designed to make you want more, not satiate you.
Do you have addictive/compulsive tendencies in other things besides eating? Did GLPs reduce those as well (I've heard that it does)?
For me, stopping fast food, most restaurant/takeout food, and processed food such as bread, pastries, chips, cookies, and any prepared/convenient "snack" items drastically reduced how often I felt hungry or just wanted to eat for no apparent reason.
No, I don't have anything like that. I have a friend with diagnosed OCD and that is an entirely different beast. And I have tried cutting that stuff out (was never big on most of it anyway) and it did absolutely nothing for this sort of thing lol.
Tinnitus really is the best way I can describe it. I didn't even realize how pervasive it was until it shut off.
I had the same experience, but not with GLP-1 drugs, but by upping my protein intake to about 0.7g per pound of body weight.
Night and day, stopped always being hungry... I've tried Noom before (eating highly filling, low calorie foods, but filling, not satiating), but that only worked while I was tracking (and always forcing myself to keep it up)...
Losing weight required work on top of that, but the protein just made my hunger response start working properly again.
I recall reading a metastudy of EU studies about 10 years ago, where they focused on three different diet classes: calorie counting, low carb, high protein.
Calorie counting diets had no restrictions on what they ate, as long as the participants didn't exceed the calorie target.
Low carb (Atkins) had no calorie restriction but had to restrict carbs.
High protein also didn't have calorie restriction but participants had to ensure at least 20% of the calories in meals were proteins.
They found that while all helped people lose weight, only the high-protein made it stick reliably.
I used that as basis for my own weight loss and it worked very well for me. As you said it made me full in a different way. YMMV.
People talk a lot about meat, but not enough about dairy. My prayers were answered at the altars of feta, greek yogurt, half and half, butter, cottage cheese, etc. They made salads not suck. They opened up a ton of lower carb dessert options. My gut health improved. All of my health improved.
I no longer treat these humble foods as optional extras. They perfectly fill the gap in my daily protein needs. They were never unwelcome, just forgotten.
Cholesterol levels are normal. I did mention salads, but fair enough, I forgot to mention how important fiber is. Some people look to these comments for advice.
I'm not advocating for a crazy diet. I'm just saying people ignore the basics and assume that healthy food has to be miserable. Small changes add up and make a big impact.
I have lost 30lbs this year and even the difference between .5 and .7 is noticeable to me.
There is also the variable that you can work out too much. I did a brutal 30 minute glycolytic conditioning session on Friday and it just doesn't matter how much protein I consume the next day. Something with ghrelin goes off the chart and the next day takes huge will power to not just eat everything.
I think it is even worse with max effort weight lifting.
I had the same experience, but with a strict keto diet, <20 net carbs / day. I started in 2014, and have maintained it more or less since. When I periodically stop it for a month or so, I get anxiety attacks, migraines, and obviously weight gain. So, I just don't stop it.
That's because of a fundamental misunderstanding of what an LLM is. The only correct answer to "Why did you do it like this?" is that the specific combination of input text and RNG state caused this particular output. There's no reasoning to be had.
* EDIT *
What's with the downvoting? That's a correct description of what happened. You can't ask an LLM why it did something and expect a coherent response, because there's no thinking chain, and no stored thinking state... At best, you can get a reconstruction of how the context relates to the output (basically a summarization of the context).
You can swap out your default lenses with multifocal lenses... I use multifocal contact lenses, and my wife and my mother both had the surgery. My wife got the panoptix (no need for glasses at all) and my mother got vivity (just need reading glasses). At night, there are halos with the panoptix lenses (same with the multifocal contact lenses), the severity is not always the same per-person, and it bothers some people more than others (interferes with night driving), but it's an option. Yes, it's another surgery, but depending on your ability to afford it, and the amount it bothers you, it is still an option. From my point of view (admittedly, with contact lenses), going from three different pairs of glasses (vision, vision+reading, plain contact lenses+reading) to contact lenses with no glasses at all was just unquestionably worth it.
I'm unfortunately not a candidate for multifocal intraocular lenses due to other problems with my eyes, otherwise I would have gone with them for the first surgery.
Multifocal contacts are probably not a good long-term fit for those same reasons, and there's the same problem with progressive lenses in glasses. Old-school bifocals are okay, but limited in the usual way.
It apparantly is a magic creaseless breakthrough... I'm eyeing one, and might put it on the Christmas wishlist...
reply