I just scroll over it. Only the newest 5000 items are preserved, by default I allow maximum 4 items per feed (some feeds more some less), titles must be at least 3 words long and I delete items if the title contains any of the badwords.
Now that I think of it, the mistake most people make is not having enough subscriptions. Some spot around 1000 feeds the experience changes dramatically. You can afford to be less interested in things as there is plenty more.
I think I find about one decent article per day for each 10 000 subs.
Disposing of crappy feeds isn't a lot of work and a word filter works really well because people want to stuff descriptive words into titles.
Business insider amused me. They are so good at writing good titles that practically non of their countless worthless publications make it though my word filter. What remains would have one think it is a reasonable website.
Not sure how thing are today but I hear the weirdest story from a German farmer a decade or so ago: They make biogas then turn it into electricity and sell it to the grid for next to nothing. What they really wanted was to pump it into the gas net for domestic use but this wasn't allowed because it is of better quality than the "normal" Russian gas. Apparently someone really cares if some other customer got better gas for the same price(!?)
He was rather pissed off about it. That and some remark that they didn't produce enough gas for the entire country. He said, we are suppose to make enough gas for the entire country but do so without selling it. They did have an association with plans to make biogas from hemp at scale. It just cant happen.
edit: Apparently their law makers came to their senses since.
There are really impressive marketing/advertisement formulas to be had. I wont share mine but I'm sure there are many ways to go step by step from not-customers to customers where each step has a known monetary value. If an LLM does something impressive in one of the steps you also know what it is worth.
I have an approach for multiple of these steps, which involves adapting a kind of non-LLMs respected authority tech approach (my previous side project), to LLMs.
I think it can be done right now with MCP servers in a way that you don't immediately hand over your data to the chatbot portal companies so that they can cut you out. (But, over time/traffic, they could quickly learn to mimick your MCP server, much like they mimick Web content and other training data, and at least appear to casual users to interact like you, even if twisted to push whatever company bid for the current user interaction. I haven't figured out what you do when they've trained on mimicking you with an evil twin; maybe you get acquired early, and then there are more resources to solve that next problem.)
From the Asian perspective perhaps, from Europe the appeal was/is the willingness to innovate and the sense of adventure. The more money people earn the more risk they are willing to take, the opposite of Europe.
Before one may begin to understand something one must first be able to estimate the level of certainty. Our robot friends, while really helpful and polite, seem to be lacking in that department. They actually think the things we've written on the internet, in books, academic papers, court documents, newspapers, etc are actually true. Where the humans aren't omniscient it fills the blanks with nonsense.
> Where the humans aren't omniscient it fills the blanks with nonsense
As do most humans. People lie. People make things up to look smart. People fervently believe things that are easily disproved. Some people are willfully ignorant, anti-science, anti-education, etc.
The problem isn't the transformer architecture... it is the humans who advertise capabilities that are not there yet.
There are human beings who believe absolutely insane and easily disprovable things. Even in the face of facts they continue to remain willfully ignorant.
Humans can convince themselves of almost anything. So I don’t understand your point.
A decade or two ago I talk with a 90 year old who bought, sold and especially exchanged everything not bolted down since he was 12. He had a crappy shed he filled with all kinds of garbage/treasures. I wouldn't call it a business. He did have businesses later on but that wasn't his primary activity. He would trade some old wood stoves for goats that he traded for a boat. That's not a business model is it? He obtained one classic car that took many years to get back on the road. Not really a business? I barely knew the guy but know enough hilarious stories to fill a book. Without that shed however he wouldn't have happened.
I was playing a game with a friend and the chat was increasingly full of angry people complaining about cheaters easily obtaining very hard to get items. He asked what I thought about it....
Well, the game is clearly very important to these people, it is increasingly visible. They are clearly very emotionally engaged. I'd say things are going really well!
Youtube was once a miraculous technical website running circles around Google video. I'm told they used a secret technology called python. Eventually Google threw the towel and didn't want to compete anymore. They were basically on the ground in a pool of bodily liquids then the referee counted all the way to 1.65 billion.
Some time went by and now you can just slap a <video> tag on a html document and call it a day. Your website will run similar circles around the new google video only much much faster.
The only problem is that [even] developers forgot <s>how</s> why to make HTML websites. I'm sure someone remembers the anchor tag and among those some even remember that you can put full paths inthere that point at other website that could [in theory] also have videos on them (if they knew <s>how</s> why)
If this was my homepage I would definitely add a picture of Dark Helmet.
Now that I think of it, the mistake most people make is not having enough subscriptions. Some spot around 1000 feeds the experience changes dramatically. You can afford to be less interested in things as there is plenty more.
I think I find about one decent article per day for each 10 000 subs.
Disposing of crappy feeds isn't a lot of work and a word filter works really well because people want to stuff descriptive words into titles.
Business insider amused me. They are so good at writing good titles that practically non of their countless worthless publications make it though my word filter. What remains would have one think it is a reasonable website.
reply