From the "About" page (top right corner of the website that left you dumbfounded)

>"Can I use" provides up-to-date browser support tables for support of front-end web technologies on desktop and mobile web browsers.

If someone is unclear about what something does and the about page is more informative, then.. provide the link to the about page instead of the ambiguous feature page.

Do you think, after commenting for the 3rd time demanding more information about caniuse, you could just have clicked that big "About" button?

The argument was against the HN title. It simply wasn't useful.

Arguing against clearer, less ambiguous HN titles is a strange position.

Your own about page says you're an elite rails dev, it's so bizarre to see you double down about caniuse's purpose being unclear.

Steven Crowder - the guy from the "change my mind" meme.

> I still greatly prefer it to the alternative, which is to have merge commits cluttering up the commit history.

I've heard this many times before, but haven't been able to figure out why this is a problem. In your workflow is it a problem to have a cluttered commit history? If so, could you explain how?

> At the same time, what about people that still fall for Nigerian princes or go through their spam folder for "sex in your area" or "penis enlargement pills"?

Those people are also victims.

Very nicely directed and edited video!

Though I must say that if the intention of the video was to make me doubt abilities to spot deep fakes, it didn't manage to achieve its goal. Both Nixon's face movements and voice felt highly unnatural and robotic to me. Although I'm sure it won't be many years until the results of such experiments will be come indistinguishable, we are not quite there yet.

His face movements were excellent, they were much like Nixon's real mannerisms. The problem was the edges of his face were pretty bad. The voice was also bad, with obvious ghosting and glitches.

That said as someone else pointed out this was done in 2019. If this was made today the face edges would be much better and audio clearer. I'd love to see this remade now.

It's interesting compare it to a real speech. Nixon has weird mannerisms but the deep fake feels like a disconnect between the speech and the words. It's tough to describe how my brain differentiates weird mannerisms and looking odd in a more fundamental way. In the deep fake when he reads off the names of the astronauts his shakes in this weird way that mind immediately screams that's not human, but nothing feels like that in the checkers speech.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpWwgwytdzk

No, that was just Nixon. ;)

Wait until they do Mark Zuckerberg; he already dwells in the uncanny valley.

Zuck's been done. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WfZuNceFDM&t=255

You can tell the fakes as they look far too human

He only wanted to become a real boy.

An objective report proving low performance doesn't do much to encourage the employee to improve.

IMO, direct call (especially if those are common in your workplace) is much better than a vague "can we talk?" before a call. Doesn't give the mind a chance to wander and fill in the context.

I'd convince the team to switch to typed or get out of the project

Regardless of anything else, it's completely within the rights of an open-source maintainer to pick and choose which users they want to dedicate time to help.

The license doesn't forbid anyone to use the software, so cryptocurrency companies are still able to benefit from the library.

Impressive. Very nice.