Hackworth

Harmonize, Generative Fill, and the Neural Filters have all been great additions to Photoshop. They’re the first thing I point to when people ask what gen AI is good for. Now watch Adobe crank up the cost on the Firefly credits.

I enjoy both hearing and performing the yarl, ya know, in moderation.

Hail Eris!

Write Strange Days 2 instead, please.

PFAS Forever!

If I do the thing, a new thing just takes its place. It’s an endless line of things. Or put another way, the dread exists first and then just finds a thing to attach itself to.

Always check the grimoire.

AI-orchestrated cyber espionage campaign

I get the sense that VLC doesn’t really care if something is a valid video file, it’s just gonna start playing and see what happens.

Now, with both on the screen, try to simultaneously see one facing left/down and one facing right/up.

I can dig it. I love layered wordplay in any language.

I forget which writer said this, but “If ya wanna make em cry, make em laugh first.”

If you’re looking for AI-generated anti-AI music, we’ve got that (mildly NSFW).

Empathize as in understand motivations and perspectives: 8

With some effort to communicate, I can usually understand how someone got where they are. It’s important to me to understand as many ways of being as possible. It’s my job to understand people, but the bigger motivation is that it bugs me if I don’t understand the root of a disagreement. Of course, this doesn’t mean I condone their perspective, believe it’s healthy/logical, or would recommend it wholesale to others.

The fact that workers with expense accounts still feel they’re getting paid so little that they deserve to commit fraud says something about that stratum of employee.

Pretty much anyone who travels has to submit receipts. Most people who travel are not making bank. They’re the people who set up and stand at convention booths, sales staff support, assistants, videographers, etc. Also, most travel is a miserable ordeal. I’m not saying it’s okay to commit fraud, but let’s not equate the hourly employee “re-creating” his lost lunch receipt with a 6-figure income.

This is kinda the plot of Hudson Hawk.

Public perception can function like any other externality, meaning you can offload costs onto it. This is regularly done, but it’d be foolish to claim that’s the case here without more information. As it would be foolish to assume the hand of the market is gently guiding us to a better world.

Planned obsolescence, subscription degradation, ad creep, landfills full of cheap crap… It’s in their interests to sell the least useful thing for the highest price. If it costs more to put in pockets, they’ll spend a surprising amount of money trying to convince people they don’t want pockets. Or better yet, just buy up every competitor until there are only a few players and decide amongst yourselves not to make better stuff. I’m not saying that’s what happened, necessarily, it’s just not a foregone conclusion that pockets are scarce because demand is scarce.

Is the hypothesis that companies have their customers’ best interests in mind? /shrug I’m just going to base my worldview on the only data I could find rather than “I remember reading a comment.” At least until I run across new data.

The only data I could find suggests women do want pockets, particularly in pants.