Groxx

42 ms·

871.
by Groxx 1y ago
Perhaps even a thousand words worth of description is possible
872.
by Groxx 1y ago
Because almost nobody has ever seen a telepresence robot in use. Like, factually. Unless you count video calls as telepresence, but I think most do not.
873.
by Groxx 1y ago
Internally... in what? Not HCL itself, I assume? Also I'm not seeing much that implies HCL has a "plan time"... I'm not familiar with HCL so I'm struggling to find much here that would be conclusive, but a lot of
874.
by Groxx 1y ago
Human languages have less "rules" and more "patterns that improve communication", and they constantly change. And even languages with like legitimate rules-bodies overseeing it still see variation in normal use. Presc
875.
by Groxx 1y ago
Yeah, I'm not claiming nobody pays for software. Clearly many do. Just that I understand people's default aversion - I encounter far more software than food that I would label "shit", despite eating far more food in to
876.
by Groxx 1y ago
I think I've seen it on news sites like once? And thanked my settings for stopping something that was surely going to annoy me. But broadly yeah, same
877.
by Groxx 1y ago
If you're routinely buying and throwing out $25 plates of food, then you're in a different income bracket than many people. And then, yes, avoiding a $3 app is more nonsensical than for most.
878.
by Groxx 1y ago
Yep. You'll find square hole covers all over, they're not rare at all. The strength of the lid and its ability to be supported is not at all an issue on a single human sized hole - it's a thick, relatively cheap slab of meta
879.
by Groxx 1y ago
Music and TV/movie streaming, and that's about it afaict. I've got it disabled too, and I essentially never see issues unless I go to Netflix.
880.
by Groxx 1y ago
> Why not just try it and if it's sucks throw it away, the same way you might with a new food item? That argument doesn't work on them for some reason. Even mediocre food is still functional, and usually still enjoyable. Quite
881.
by Groxx 1y ago
Just another reason to report literally anything from a business that you don't desire as spam. Auto-checking that "send me spam emails" box should hurt their spam score enough to make them stop doing it.
882.
by Groxx 1y ago
Since this is in contrast to "wildly not flat and full of visual gimmicks": the modern "flat" style has severe (and very stupid) issues, yea. But "flat" has been around for a very long time in touch UI with
883.
by Groxx 1y ago
It's cheap and easy to install a vertical pipe when you're already laying a ton of horizontal pipe.
884.
by Groxx 1y ago
It's honestly pretty funny to me that apparently this is one of the worst things I've ever said here. I mean. I don't disagree. But lol
885.
by Groxx 1y ago
There is "wont" and "cant" but theyre rather rare nowadays. Probably others too, but Im (...im?) not able to remember any easily. The closest I can think of thats maybe confusing is plurals vs possessive... but thats us
886.
by Groxx 1y ago
Yep. Forces me to erase some and/or move it to some kind of backlog that I never look at.
887.
by Groxx 1y ago
tbh I'm not quite sure if you're arguing in favor of switching to "it's" or against. I think against...? Clearly "x is" is most consistent in that example, implying the possessive form is inconsistent.
888.
by Groxx 1y ago
Whiteboards have been my main strategy too. And a little while ago I ran across this: https://community.frame.work/t/whiteboard-input-module/58985 and bought the same stickers and pens and it works much better
889.
by Groxx 1y ago
I'm on the fence with its/it's... but mostly I think I'd be fine with "its" disappearing. It's almost never ambiguous in writing or speaking given context, and it's a weird possessive-form inconsiste
890.
by Groxx 1y ago
There's also fuzzy datatype mapping in general, where they're like 90%+ identical but the remaining fields need minor special handling. Building a generator capable of handling all variations you might need is extremely hard[1
891.
by Groxx 1y ago
Yeah, honestly I still like some things about it better than other OSes. And the web/native fusion was much better than anything similar that iOS or Android have tried (though not perfect either). Though I am very unhappy to see that i
892.
by Groxx 1y ago
I'm certainly happy to see "force grouping". Grouping is a great opt-in enhancement, but it never should've been wholly in apps' control to begin with - apps in general cannot be trusted to not be dumb, gotta have
893.
by Groxx 1y ago
Got bad news for ya on Android... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43975352 It's not glassy (thank god), but it is just as disorientingly-bouncy. I am quite happy with Mint/XFCE on the Linux side though. Clea
894.
by Groxx 1y ago
Disabling animations is also the quickest way to remind yourself that computers are in fact pretty fast. No more waiting a half second after every action for things to stop moving, it responds instantly .
895.
by Groxx 1y ago
Google and Apple are both on some weird bouncy shrooms or something this year. What the heck. Both new UIs look truly awful, and seem like accessibility nightmares. I will continue enthusiastically disabling animations.
896.
by Groxx 1y ago
Sadly it's now part of CSS. Thanks, Google. https://adrianroselli.com/2025/05/my-request-to-google-on-ac...
897.
by Groxx 1y ago
I kinda wonder if pushing it into a separate/work profile would isolate it from this... though it kinda smells to be like something that might accidentally (or "accidentally") leak.
898.
by Groxx 1y ago
I feel like adding a bit more brainfuckery would help obscure stuff. Make people use Church numerals to form ASCII characters - it'll encourage golfing it down to something equally as obtuse as ++++++++[>++++[>++>+++>
899.
by Groxx 1y ago
I don't believe[1] any of those are part of the MCP protocol - it's essentially "the LLM decided to call it, with X arguments, and will interpret the results however it likes". It's an escape hatch for the LLM to u
900.
by Groxx 1y ago
The same way it knows anything else. So not at all, but that doesn't mean it's not useful.

More ›