> the process of generating the cards contributes substantially to the learning and memory formation.
How is creating a card anything different than reviewing the card once? Anki is a long term tool, writing something down once isn't. The time spent creating cards is better spent on doing more reviews.
There is actually scientific evidence that direct engagement with material (e.g. making notes, re-writing in your own words, completing exercises, explaining it to others, etc.) is very beneficial to memory formation.
So, although creating a card is similar to reviewing it once (in that they will both help you remember it for a while), the former is worth more than the latter as a "unit" of memorisation. This means that you'll likely have longer review intervals, and therefore spend less time on reviews, if you wrote the card yourself, because the memory starts out stronger.
That has to be balanced of course with the amount of time you spend writing the card vs the gains you make in saved review time from having done so.
Making notes and re-writing in your own words have actually been found to not be very useful to memory formation [1]. Completing exercises works great: this corresponds to reviewing cards. Explaining it to others also works OK, but I'm not sure if creating cards is analagous to that.
Try it and you will see why ;) This is a classic beginner mistake. In most cases, you are not only reviewing the card but also trying to learn something new in a random nonsensical order which you haven't mastered yet - that doesn't work.
At the risk of sounding glib, the first way that comes to mind is that the learner is using their own intellect and (short-term) memory to code the information into their own words (often or usually entailing at least some self-checking and critique) instead of merely "reviewing" (really, seeing for the first time) an unfamiliar association of prompt and response, which was generated by a stochastic program, and which may not be correct at all.
If you think that the purpose of OS X or Apple devices is to live in the web browser or live in the terminal, then you've been very misinformed. It's on the level of buying a motorcycle and expecting it to have a roof. And then complaining about the manufacturer. Apple stuff has worked like this for decades.
This is surprisingly easy to beat using very funny methods, like splitting the request in the middle of SNI, or sending a request with a low TTL to an unblocked website first which gets dropped then repeating it to the correct SNI.
There are more methods all of which I find very funny for some reason. You can use GoodbyeDPI on Windows and zapret on Linux.
The disadvantage of those methods is that they require installing custom software, and they don't work on mobile devices unless you put them behind a router with custom firmware. In contrast, DoH works out of the box on most operating systems, and hopefully ECH will work as well.
Slightly (or very) off topic, but I think it fits so I will write what I feel about people talking about their AI experiences. Feel free to ignore my opinion. I just wanted to know if there is anyone who feels the same way.
Listening to someone talk about "their chat with ChatGPT" etc. feels very annoying. It's like they are explaining a dream they had in detail but even less informative or useful because a dream might suggest something about their state of mind. However, content like this (to be fair, this specific one isn't that annoying to me especially compared to "AI said this and that" kind of stuff) has absolutely no constructive value (to me) and feels almost schizophrenic. Maybe I feel this way because people around me, unlike the average HN user's social circle, have only superficial idea about how AI works but are very interested in using it.
