Just like human atoms have been repurposed to make other things.

Let's flip the hypothetical -- if someone googles for suicide info and scrolls past the hotline info and ends up killing themselves anyway, should google be on the hook?

I don't know. In that scenario, has any google software sold as being intelligent produced text encouraging and providing help with the act?

I don't know this for sure, but also I'm fairly sure that google make a concerted effort to not expose that information. Again, from experience. It's very hard to google a painless way to kill yourself.

Their SEO ranking actually ranks pages about suicide prevention very high.

The solution that is going to be found, is they will put some age controls, probably half-heartedly, and call it a day. I don't think the public can stomach the possible free speech limitations on consenting adults to use a dangerous tool that might cause them to hurt themselves.

Shortcat has a ~second delay before showing links, homerow (https://www.homerow.app) is faster.

I wonder if it has to do with accessibility API thread locking. I found a different extension I used to emulate an i3 style environment suffered when I used the Unity game engine. It ended up being limitations of the accessibility API.

Could be, but there is another app that does the same thing faster so there must be some optimizations available.

This delay is configurable. The delay is there so you can actually type a bit before the UI pops up, and then the UI will be filtered to just your selection.

The configuration lies. Even with "Show hints" set to "Immediately", there is a long delay. Feels like half a second on M1 Pro.

Fair, fair—it's default is longer, so dialing it down made it feel zippy by comparison.

I'm trying out Homerow and I'm really liking it! Thanks for mentioning it. I might end up sticking with it actually.

There's the cue for my biennial reread of Peter Watts' Blindsight.

Did you read his followup Echopraxia? How would you say it compared to Blindsight?

I've read Blindsight multiple times, and weirdly couldn't finish Echopraxia. Maybe this time.

Went into my list. Appreciated :)

Uncritical acceptance of the premise is a defense. The assumption is that patents "incentivize inventors". This is an empirical claim that is at odds with historical evidence: https://fee.org/articles/do-patents-encourage-or-hinder-inno...

There are solid economic arguments that they were never the right model, even "back in The Day": http://www.dklevine.com/general/intellectual/againstfinal.ht...

Patents are government granted monopolies on ideas. The case for them is that you need the carrot of a monopoly to incentivize innovators (empirically untrue). The case against them is that government mandated monopolies immediately dampen all subsequent innovation until expiry (empirically true across industries throughout history).

How about the delayed electrification in Britain? It seems that elswhere it began in the late 1870s, but there was no major electrification in Britain before the 20th century. I thought maybe it was also because of some patent obstruction?

Driving your car incurs real externalities. Putting a price on it fixes the artificial extra incentive to drive, by making freeloaders pay up.

Taking up space, degrading public infrastructure, polluting the air, and killing pedestrians are real ongoing costs of transportation. The cost does not magically end at vehicle purchase.

Interesting read. But to me, describing attention as "a weighted mean of a continous learned k-v map lookup" is direct and descriptive, while saying "it's just kernel smoothing" is opaque and referential.

Maybe take the best of both worlds: "It's just kernel smoothing, which is a weighted mean of a continuous learned kv-map lookup."

Now you got the definition, and the alternative naming you can use to search for resources.