NoSuggest is a quiet act of resistance against YouTube algorithms always trying to pull you into a loop of unlimited videos in turn into unlimited screen time. With unending side cards of videos, auto-play, what's next suggestions, YouTube shorts and notifications, users will be doom scrolling for many hours in a day. I faced the same problem. Acknowledging that, not all content in YouTube is bad. There are educational videos, genuine news contents without political bias which is very hard to fi

WiiM, the audio company that's challenged the idea that audiophile-level performance requires a small loan, is expanding its whole-home ecosystem with the WiiM Bar, which releases in July. Much like its other speakers and audio components, the WiiM Bar supports a bunch of streaming options and expandability at an affordable price - in this case, […]

i've been leaning on ai for real decisions lately. not "write me an email" stuff, actual ones. whether to take a contract, whether an idea's worth building, how to price something. and i kept running into the same thing: the answer totally depends on which model i happen to open that day. one says go for it. one lists every reason to wait. one hedges so hard it's useless. i was making real calls off these and slowly realized i wasn't getting an answer, i was getting one model's opinion in a confident voice and treating it like it settled things. so i started pasting the same question into 5 different models and reading them next to each other. and the interesting part was never where they agreed. agreement usually just meant the call was obvious and i was overthinking it. the value was where they split. the one model that broke from the other four was usually pointing right at the thing i hadn't thought about. the disagreement was the signal, not the noise. stuff i've noticed doing this for a couple weeks: fast agreement = easy decision, stop overthinking it a clean split = there's a tradeoff you haven't actually named yet the odd one out is right more often than "4 vs 1" makes it sound, because the other four are usually just pattern-matching the same obvious take i got obsessed enough that i've been building something to automate the side-by-side and have the models actually push back on each other instead of me copy-pasting across five tabs. but that's not really the point of this. mostly just curious if other people landed in the same place. do you trust the disagreement between models more than the consensus? also maybe people arent making decisions with ai like i am that i need to be pressure tested before answers come back to me? lmk submitted by /u/wartableapp [link] [留言]

The subscription is also getting some indie projects that are worth a look.

tokenmaxxing is the new AI slop Posting from our company account, so the usual disclaimer: we build code review and reliability tooling, and that access is how we got this data. Pulled 1M+ pull requests across 2,444 engineering orgs to answer a question almost nobody is measuring: when a team spends on AI coding tools, how much of it actually turns into shipped product? The short version: $0.18 of every dollar reaches users. The other $0.82 goes to bug fixing, rework, and review that catches nothing. 44% of all PRs at the median org are reactive work, not new features. 1 in 4 lines of code written each week gets deleted before the week ends. Over 12 weeks, PR volume grew 2.6x while reverted PRs grew 3.7x. Failures are scaling faster than output. Roughly half of all PRs get approved in under an hour. Our read: AI made generating code cheap but did nothing about the loop after merge, so maintenance compounds. Genuinely curious whether this matches what people here see on their own teams, or whether our sample skews a certain way. Full report with charts, percentile breakdowns, and methodology: https://research.entelligence.ai/ submitted by /u/entelligenceai17 [link] [留言]

And Robert Rodriguez wept.

Defense tech is red hot right now. Anduril and Mach Industries just doubled and quadrupled their valuations, respectively, and the U.S. government is proposing a 40% increase in defense budget. A wave of new startups is chasing those government contracts, but according to Ross Fubini, the venture investor who wrote Anduril’s first check, most of them will get lost in the Valley of Death between prototype contract […]

Bulk delete, archive & timestamp your ChatGPT conversations Discussion | Link

In our project, each time the user types in the address input, a mapbox request is made, with a debounce time of 400 ms. It's one of those inputs where you type an address, and it suggests addresses in a dropdown. I believe we're doing more requests than we should, what's a good debounce time for a case like that? 500 ms? 600 ms? submitted by /u/leinad41 [link] [留言]

Google must change AI Overviews after claiming users don't want "lots of sources."