Graphene os is a niche within a niche. I’d never even heard of it before I joined lemmy, and I’m no stranger to custom roms.

If you’re being earnest, it’s been the best selling vehicle every year in the US for four decades straight.

You might as well ask “Who drives f150’s?” A metric fuck-ton of people

They’re asking which distro. They said they already tried Ubuntu and didn’t care for it

This is rapidly becoming less and less true unfortunately

Underlying kernel aside, I think that the Steamdeck’s SteamOS is an excellent example of how “easy to use” != “smaller feature-set”. I’ve heard countless times from apple dudes that the reason that their stuff allegedly “just works” is because of the lack of some functionally that if present would overwhelm the user. You know, as if ios and android don’t share fundamentally the same user interface principles. But they do have a point, a green user can be overwhelmed when presented with a huge feature set all at once. Yet, despite SteamOS literally having a full-blown desktop environment, the UI frankly is way less confusing than my Xbox. It just goes to show that it’s not about the number of features, it’s about how they’re presented. Power users don’t mind digging into a (well designed) settings menu to enable some advanced functionality, and keeping those advanced features and settings (with reasonable defaults) hidden around the corner behind an unlocked door helps the newbie get started with confidence.

Depends on the client too I think

I’m the same way with Kazakhstan and Saskatchewan

Very well said

There is no good local takeaway in my current area. I briefly lived in an area that had a decent place (not even great, just a notch above the chains) and it ruined crappy pizzas for me enough to take up pizza making. I mean don’t get me wrong I’ll still do little Caesars from time to time if I need cheap calories, but if I want real pizza I’ll make it myself.

I’m with you on Skullcandy headphones. It’s not just that they’re cheap, there’s better ones for the same or less. Anker soundcore are my go to - pretty good and very affordable. Mpow honestly weren’t bad, I’d get them before Skullcandy. My low-mid range Sony’s have been great and shockingly durable.

But my skullcandies all sounded like listening through a pair of socks, and the controls were awful when they did work, which wasn’t very long.

That makes sense and that’s fair

There’s a difference between goofy and dumb. Goofy is fun, I’m all over that. Actually dumb is exhausting and awkward, it’s just not fun

I just had an Amazon package delayed for a week it says. It doesn’t name names but…

A small number of deliveries may arrive a day later than anticipated due to a third-party technology outage.

For me when I’m daydreaming it’s like watching a movie, my eyes might be open but I don’t see shit, my brain’s doing other things. Or when I’m visualizing something it’s like free and organic AR. But yeah, no dialogue necessary, it’s like a hallucination that I control.

Machine learning is a subset of artificial intelligence, along with things like machine perception, reasoning, and planning. Like I said in a different thread, ai is a really, really broad term. It doesn’t need to actually be Jarvis to be AI. You’re thinking of general ai

“Aware of its surroundings” is a pretty general phrase though. You, presumably a human, can only be as aware as far as your senses enable you to be. We (humans) tend to assume that we have complete awareness of our surroundings, but how could we possibly know? If there was something out there we weren’t aware of, well we aren’t aware of it. What we know as our “surroundings” is a construct the brain invents to parse our own “raw sensor data”. To an LLM, it “senses” strings of tokens. That’s its whole environment, it’s all that it can comprehend. From its perspective, there’s nothing else. Basically all I’m saying is that you seem to be taking awareness-of-surroundings to mean awareness-of-surroundings-like-a-human, when it’s much more broad than that. Arguably uselessly broad, granted, but the intent of the phrase is to say that an AI should observe and react flexibly.

Really all “AI” is just a handwavy term for “the next step in flexible, reactive computing”. Today that happens to look like LLMs and diffusion models.

AI is broader term then you think, it goes back to the beginnings of modern computing with Alan Turing. You seem to be thinking about the movie definition of AI, not the academic.

Edit: I misread the comment chain. I’ll just leave mine though

Always picking the most rewarding next step is called a greedy algorithm, so mathematically it might be good but not usually optimal because you might be sacrificing long-term success for short-term gains. Somet